Check

 

Defiance Boats!

LURECHARGE!

THE PP OUTDOOR FORUMS

Kast Gear!

Power Pro Shimano Reels G Loomis Rods

  Willie boats! Puffballs!

 

Three Rivers Marine

 

 
Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5 >
Topic Options
Rate This Topic
#923301 - 02/19/15 10:32 PM CCA, PSA, NSIA, FishNW letter on SB5844 and HB1660
bushbear Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 08/26/02
Posts: 4709
Loc: Sequim
CCA, PSA, NSIA, and FishNW combined on a joint letter to the Senate Natural Resource and Parks Committee with copies to the House Bill 1660 sponsors yesterday, Feb. 18, before the hearing. The letter is lengthy. With the logos, graphs, and tables, it is too hard to cut and paste into a text field.

The letter has been set up in a Dropbox file for folks to read. I would strongly encourage you to take a look at it.



https://www.dropbox.com/s/e2u8fa023b016fp/SB5844%20Joint%20Letter_FINAL.pdf?dl=0

February 18, 2015

Senate Natural Resources & Parks Committee Members
435 J.A.Cherberg Building
Olympia, WA 98504

Chairman Pearson and Senators Dansel, Hatfield, Chase, Hewitt, McAuliffe, and Warnick:

We write in advance of the Committee’s hearing on SB 5844, legislation to recognize and prioritize the economic, social, conservation, and state revenue benefits of recreational fishing
in Washington State. For far too long our state’s policies have ignored the economic and agency revenue implications of how our fisheries are managed. The result has been seasonsetting
and resource allocation decisions that often stifle the economic, social, and revenue benefits of these fisheries to our state. SB 5844 represents a significant step forward at a time when WDFW and the Legislature are poised to ask even more of recreational anglers in the
form of increased license fees.

Top
#923304 - 02/20/15 01:30 AM Re: CCA, PSA, NSIA, FishNW letter on SB5844 and HB1660 [Re: bushbear]
Lucky Louie Offline
Carcass

Registered: 11/30/09
Posts: 2286
The graph on the WDFW budget sources tells the story. Fish license fees produces the most revenue for the department. Of the 9 budget resources for the department, the commercial sector is dead last in funding but still expects priority fishing in most of the state for chinook and coho.
_________________________
The world will not be destroyed by those that are evil, but by those who watch them without doing anything.- Albert Einstein

No you can’t have my rights---I’m still using them





Top
#923309 - 02/20/15 07:31 AM Re: CCA, PSA, NSIA, FishNW letter on SB5844 and HB1660 [Re: bushbear]
CedarR Offline
Repeat Spawner

Registered: 08/04/99
Posts: 1463
Loc: Olympia, WA
The letter is well written, and the facts are persuasive. If fairness and facts played a bigger role in decision making in Olympia, these bills would sweep through both chambers. Great to see our angler groups working together!

Top
#923312 - 02/20/15 08:10 AM Re: CCA, PSA, NSIA, FishNW letter on SB5844 and HB1660 [Re: bushbear]
bushbear Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 08/26/02
Posts: 4709
Loc: Sequim


You can track SB 5844 and HB 1660 in the link below.

You can also send comments on the bills by checking the comment box. It is an easy way to let your legislators know how you feel about the bills.



http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=5844&year=2015

If there are any other bills you are tracking you can call them up, see the progress or lack thereof, and make comments.

Top
#923502 - 02/22/15 10:10 PM Re: CCA, PSA, NSIA, FishNW letter on SB5844 and HB1660 [Re: bushbear]
Dogfish Offline
Poodle Smolt

Registered: 05/03/01
Posts: 10979
Loc: McCleary, WA
So is this letter asking for additional fee increases? Sounds like the Discover Pass debacle all over again.

Me and every hunter who accesses state land now pays more for the same land we had access to before. The downside is WEYCO, Green Diamond and the like have increased their fees forcing people off of their lands and increasing the pressure on the state lands I and many other people hunt.

Add to this the WFC lawsuit that shut down steelhead hatchery production on Puget Sound rivers, funneling more pressure on the rivers I fish in the county I live in. Will the decreased hathery production also apply to salmon and therefore have an effect on the Puget Sound salmon fisheries? I haven't looked into the lawsuit details, so that would be great if someone could clarify that for me. Thanks in advance for that.

Not a really big fan of paying more for access to what I have access to today. The promise of more opportunity rings hollow when no effort is made to decrease the number of fish caught in AK and Canada that are on their way to Washington.

Are we paying Canada money to lay off these fisheries? If so, what has been the net effect of that?

Sorry, but as a dad who has seen license fees for me and my boys go from $600/year to over a $1,000/year I am extremely skeptical.
_________________________
"Give me the anger, fish! Give me the anger!"

They call me POODLE SMOLT!

The Discover Pass is brought to you by your friends at the CCA.

Top
#923506 - 02/23/15 04:42 AM Re: CCA, PSA, NSIA, FishNW letter on SB5844 and HB1660 [Re: Dogfish]
Rivrguy Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4394
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
DF not sure what you are carrying on about fee increases as neither of the bills are about that and you are well aware of it. The position that is developing from the conversation is that if the agency wants a fee increase Recs are saying the funds must go to REC programs not spent on supporting Commercial programs. In fact many are now saying that ALL Rec fees go for Rec programs ( includes our current fees) and Commercials pay there own way or no increase. 5844 & 1660 are simply Rec priority bills and with the Commission's new budget policy stating that Rec fees go for Rec programs funding is brought into the conversation.
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in

Top
#923510 - 02/23/15 06:56 AM Re: CCA, PSA, NSIA, FishNW letter on SB5844 and HB1660 [Re: bushbear]
Dogfish Offline
Poodle Smolt

Registered: 05/03/01
Posts: 10979
Loc: McCleary, WA
Just looking at the letter and the message it appears to be sending.

"SB 5844 represents a significant step forward at a time when WDFW and the Legislature are poised to ask even more of recreational anglers in the form of increased license fees."

"The recreational fishing community’s potential support for any additional license fee increases is contingent on policy reforms that recognize and prioritize these benefits."

The intent of these two sentences appear to tell the legislature to go ahead with fee increases and and that there will be possible support for them if these bills pass.

I didn't write the letter and I'm not talking about the short game here, with these two bills. I'm talking about the long game, what is next and what may happen down the road. All through the body of the letter it discusses fees, the collection of them, and apparently support for future increases.
_________________________
"Give me the anger, fish! Give me the anger!"

They call me POODLE SMOLT!

The Discover Pass is brought to you by your friends at the CCA.

Top
#923515 - 02/23/15 09:08 AM Re: CCA, PSA, NSIA, FishNW letter on SB5844 and HB1660 [Re: bushbear]
CedarR Offline
Repeat Spawner

Registered: 08/04/99
Posts: 1463
Loc: Olympia, WA
Below are the cut-off dates for action on bills in the legislature. One was met when SB5844 was heard in the Senate Natural Resources and Parks Committee. I'm guessing HB 1660 missed the deadline for a hearing in the House, but Representatives could still get a look at this legislation if the Senate sent it back to the House for action. What's next? Where can individual effort best be applied to keep SB 5844/HB 1660 moving? Probably be a big mistake for sportsmen to go silent on this legislation now.

February 20, 2015 Last day to read in committee reports in house of origin, except House fiscal committees and Senate Ways & Means and Transportation committees.

February 27, 2015 Last day to read in committee reports from House fiscal committees and Senate Ways & Means and Transportation committees in house of origin.

March 11, 2015 Last day to consider bills in house of origin (5 p.m.).

April 1, 2015 Last day to read in committee reports from opposite house, except House fiscal committees and Senate Ways & Means and Transportation committees.

April 7, 2015 Last day to read in opposite house committee reports from House fiscal committees and Senate Ways & Means and Transportation committees.

April 15, 2015* Last day to consider opposite house bills (5 p.m.) (except initiatives and alternatives to initiatives, budgets and matters necessary to implement budgets, differences between the houses, and matters incident to the interim and closing of the session).

April 26, 2015 Last day allowed for regular session under state constitution.

Top
#923516 - 02/23/15 09:39 AM Re: CCA, PSA, NSIA, FishNW letter on SB5844 and HB1660 [Re: bushbear]
GodLovesUgly Offline
Repeat Spawner

Registered: 04/20/09
Posts: 1269
Loc: WaRshington
DF, we all know the fee increases are inevitable, I think the message is that we SUPPORT paying more if given MORE opportunity.

If they extend my season 2 months and double my quota, I would gladly give the department an extra 5$ a year on my license.


Here is the carrot:

Conservation
Non-tribal commercial salmon fisheries are almost entirely non-selective, meaning they are unable to selectively harvest returning hatchery salmon while releasing the wild salmon unharmed. Recreational fisheries are capable of mark-selective harvest, which represents a key tool in wild salmon recovery and hatchery reform efforts. With over a dozen stocks of Washington salmon and steelhead listed under the federal Endangered Species Act it is time to prioritize selective fishing practices
_________________________
When I grow up I want to be,
One of the harvesters of the sea.
I think before my days are done,
I want to be a fisherman.

Top
#923518 - 02/23/15 09:43 AM Re: CCA, PSA, NSIA, FishNW letter on SB5844 and HB1660 [Re: Dogfish]
slabhunter Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 01/17/04
Posts: 3742
Loc: Sheltona Beach
Originally Posted By: Dogfish
Just looking at the letter and the message it appears to be sending.

"SB 5844 represents a significant step forward at a time when WDFW and the Legislature are poised to ask even more of recreational anglers in the form of increased license fees."

"The recreational fishing community’s potential support for any additional license fee increases is contingent on policy reforms that recognize and prioritize these benefits."

The intent of these two sentences appear to tell the legislature to go ahead with fee increases and and that there will be possible support for them if these bills pass.

I didn't write the letter and I'm not talking about the short game here, with these two bills. I'm talking about the long game, what is next and what may happen down the road. All through the body of the letter it discusses fees, the collection of them, and apparently support for future increases.


I see things in a different light. This is at issue with the PFMC and the Canada/US treaty. Time to allow more salmon to return to home waters.

A high tide raises all local boats. whistle
_________________________
When we are forgotten, we cease to exist .
Share your outdoor skills.

Top
#923523 - 02/23/15 11:10 AM Re: CCA, PSA, NSIA, FishNW letter on SB5844 and HB1660 [Re: CedarR]
CedarR Offline
Repeat Spawner

Registered: 08/04/99
Posts: 1463
Loc: Olympia, WA
Originally Posted By: CedarR
What's next? Where can individual effort best be applied to keep SB 5844/HB 1660 moving?


Just received an email from Senator Ann Rivers stating that SB 5844 did not make it out of the Senate Committee on Friday and it will not be moving forward this session.

Representative Pike sent a very positive email with plans to keep working for this legislation, or the intent of it. Might be a year away, but she seems very motivated.


Edited by CedarR (02/23/15 12:02 PM)
Edit Reason: new email

Top
#923543 - 02/23/15 01:38 PM Re: CCA, PSA, NSIA, FishNW letter on SB5844 and HB1660 [Re: bushbear]
DrifterWA Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 04/25/00
Posts: 5074
Loc: East of Aberdeen, West of Mont...
Where can a person find "who held SB5844 up, so it didn't make it out of committee".....is this a voted on process ????? Can we find out how any voting on any bill, by Senators or Rep., pro/con....if this available????
_________________________
"Worse day sport fishing, still better than the best day working"

"I thought growing older, would take longer"

Top
#923544 - 02/23/15 02:04 PM Re: CCA, PSA, NSIA, FishNW letter on SB5844 and HB1660 [Re: bushbear]
Dogfish Offline
Poodle Smolt

Registered: 05/03/01
Posts: 10979
Loc: McCleary, WA
Ranker also pulled his support just before the hearing. Anybody know why?

Past performance is not a guarantee of future performance, but it does give you insight as to how it works and how they think. License fees have gone up and access has decreased, historically.

What additional opportunity do we hope to gain by supporting higher fees? What is the next game plan if a bill like this was to pass next year? What is the next opportunity to charge us more for than what we currently pay to do today? What guarantee do we have that additional fee revenue would be used as stated? Aren't there funds related to the Wynooche dam that have just been sitting in limbo?
_________________________
"Give me the anger, fish! Give me the anger!"

They call me POODLE SMOLT!

The Discover Pass is brought to you by your friends at the CCA.

Top
#923546 - 02/23/15 02:49 PM Re: CCA, PSA, NSIA, FishNW letter on SB5844 and HB1660 [Re: DrifterWA]
rojoband Offline
Returning Adult

Registered: 05/31/08
Posts: 264
Originally Posted By: DrifterWA
Where can a person find "who held SB5844 up, so it didn't make it out of committee".....is this a voted on process ????? Can we find out how any voting on any bill, by Senators or Rep., pro/con....if this available????



Ahh, this is unfortunately not straight forward. Hold of bills in committee can be due to several scenarios, all political. The chair sets the agenda for what gets executively voted on, but they will likely poll the committee, at least those in their own party, before bringing/adding any bill to the executive agenda to know what might happen. So the chair holds quite a bit of power and bills up during any session, but can't always be solely blamed. This type of discussion happens in caucus (which is out of the public's view), and quite often (obviously) votes are horse traded for "if I support this then you support a bill I bring" types of deals. Furthermore the majority party head honchos, (i.e., Senate party leader, floor Chair, etc.) sometimes influence bills in certain committees, as they have the authority to remove/assign who chairs which committees. Essentially all this provides for a vast variety of influence pedaling....meaning you have to be pretty constant, and vigilant to get ANYTHING through to process. Essentially folks set this up to make it pretty hard to change laws...which it is. What I'm saying is it will be hard to pinpoint why or who is directly at fault for not moving it out of committee exactly. All you can tell is that it didn't have enough support to do so, otherwise it would have.

Top
#923556 - 02/23/15 07:31 PM Re: CCA, PSA, NSIA, FishNW letter on SB5844 and HB1660 [Re: rojoband]
N W Panhandler Offline
Three Time Spawner

Registered: 01/05/07
Posts: 1560
Loc: Bremerton, Wa.
The dept fish and wildlife has said they are after 3 million dollars more in this budget through increased fee's. So the fee's are going up if they can help it........
_________________________
A little common sense is good, more is better.
Kitsap Chapter CCA


Top
#923566 - 02/23/15 08:10 PM Re: CCA, PSA, NSIA, FishNW letter on SB5844 and HB1660 [Re: N W Panhandler]
Larry B Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 10/22/09
Posts: 3020
Loc: University Place and Whidbey I...
Originally Posted By: N W Panhandler
The dept fish and wildlife has said they are after 3 million dollars more in this budget through increased fee's. So the fee's are going up if they can help it........


Hmmm......just thinking. If Puget Sound NT commercial crabbers had to pay WDFW the same amount per crab harvested that the P.S. recreational crabbers pay (fees divided by number of crab harvested) they'd have that new $3MM. Not gonna happen but that is a prime example of the disparity folks are unhappy about.
_________________________
Remember to immediately record your catch or you may become the catch!

It's the person who has done nothing who is sure nothing can be done. (Ewing)

Top
#923567 - 02/23/15 08:13 PM Re: CCA, PSA, NSIA, FishNW letter on SB5844 and HB1660 [Re: bushbear]
Dogfish Offline
Poodle Smolt

Registered: 05/03/01
Posts: 10979
Loc: McCleary, WA
How about an increase in renewals of commercial fishing licenses?
_________________________
"Give me the anger, fish! Give me the anger!"

They call me POODLE SMOLT!

The Discover Pass is brought to you by your friends at the CCA.

Top
#923586 - 02/24/15 05:31 AM Re: CCA, PSA, NSIA, FishNW letter on SB5844 and HB1660 [Re: Dogfish]
Rivrguy Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4394
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
Some thoughts on the bills from someone familiar with the process.



The "ding bat woman" is the sponsor of the bill you mention to put more commercials on the Commission. Chase from Shoreline has close ties to commercial fishing, I think from family background.

There's 7 on committee which takes 4 votes to pass out. Prime sponser is the Chair who is an R. He had 3 other R's to get the 4 plus possibly 2 other Ds. Didn't move the bill out by committee cutoff on Friday so its dead for this session. Same with Chase's bill to stack deck at the Commission. Both are dead for the session.

Leaves the question of the fee increases. HB 1563 by Blake raises taxes & fees on commercials. That was transferred out of his committee over to appropriations. It's still alive but the others didn't move. Course, anything can be added back in during passage of the final budget.
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in

Top
#923588 - 02/24/15 07:20 AM Re: CCA, PSA, NSIA, FishNW letter on SB5844 and HB1660 [Re: bushbear]
Carcassman Online   content
River Nutrients

Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 7413
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
Why would one expect that higher fees have to result in more access or more fish or more game? Costs increase. Just to produce fish in the hatchery will cost more. Currently, the WDFW lands are not well maintained. How "nice" are the sanitary facilities and trash cans at the launches.

Not to disagree or denigrate the idea that WDFW needs to improve the state of hunting and fishing and access, but they are simply underfunded-and maybe poorly led- currently.

Top
#923590 - 02/24/15 08:41 AM Re: CCA, PSA, NSIA, FishNW letter on SB5844 and HB1660 [Re: Carcassman]
Rivrguy Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4394
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
The Rec fee increase did not make it but still has life in budget process. Commission budget policy is C&P below.


Commission Budget Policy 2015-17
(Draft revised 09/1/2014)
Reduction in General Funds and Increase in License Fees

The Department’s share of General Funds - State (GF-S) has declined dramatically over the past five years, decreasing from $110 million in 2008 to $61 million in 2014. Once again this year, the Department was directed to prepare and submit a budget with additional GF-S reductions of 15%, or roughly $11 million. The cuts presented in that submission are distributed over the activities that are largely supported with GF-S: enforcement, habitat protection, native fish recovery, and fish management activities associated with commercial fisheries.

Over this same period, the share of Department costs supported with sport fishing license revenues has grown. License fees were increased three years ago and now represent the largest single portion of funding. The Department now faces increased costs of maintaining existing services. In addition, we see the potential of additional cuts in future biennia to allow the state to meet its K-12 educational obligations under the McCleary decision. The Department also faces the prospects of additional reductions in federal funding that support hatchery production and critical fishery sampling and monitoring activities. If it is to maintain and expand opportunity for recreational fishing, the Department must pursue additional fee increases.

Approach for Sport Fishing License Fee Increases
The Commission recognizes the benefits of sport fishing across the state in generating funding for agency activities well beyond fishery management cost. Deposited in the Wildlife Account, user fees support such things as native fish recovery, fish production, and a variety of costs associated with management of the fisheries. It is the policy of the Department to ensure that recreational license fees are used for the benefit of the sport fishery. To be successful, the Department is committed to working closely with the sport fishing community to define the new fee structure and to identify specifically the use of the new revenue created from the new fees. The Commission recognizes that increased fees can be counterproductive. Increased fees can lead to declines in sales. To counteract that response, the Department must develop specific proposals that result in increased sport fishing opportunity.

The Commission believes that it would be beneficial to look for ways to make practical commitments to expand sport fishing opportunities at the same time that it pursues a course during this Legislative Session that avoids the need for additional license increases in the next two biennia.

Cost Benefit Analysis and Budget Decisions: Salmon Fishery Activities
The Director will provide a report to the Commission that includes all the available information relative to the costs of providing and managing sport and commercial fisheries including enforcement, monitoring, and hatchery production costs. The Director will include in his report a breakdown of the revenue sources that support the activities (GFS, federal, local, DJ). Within existing resources, the Director will also report to the Commission the Department’s best estimates of the economic benefits and license revenues that are derived by the state from each major salmon fishery, e.g. Puget Sound, Willapa Bay, and the Columbia River.

It is the policy of the Department that consideration be given to the comparable economic and agency revenue benefits of respective fisheries as various cuts, fee increases, and policy changes are proposed and discussed by budget decision-makers.
Promote Selective Fisheries

The Commission adopted policies that support hatchery and harvest reform and realigned management in a number of specific fisheries to promote more selective harvest practices. The Director will ensure that the Department’s biennial budget submission includes elements that significantly advance selective fisheries and hatchery reform measures.

Equitable Sharing of the Costs of Management
In light of continued reduction of GF-S, the Commission directs the Department to seek means to recoup the costs of hatchery production and management of commercial fisheries from the participants in the commercial fisheries or reduce agency activities in support of these fisheries.


The cost of managing and maintaining commercial fisheries has long been funded with general fund revenue. Commercial licenses provide very limited revenues to offset management costs -- roughly 4% of the costs of these fisheries. Unlike sport fishing license revenue, funds from the sale of commercial salmon licenses largely go directly to the state treasury. The sizable reduction in general fund revenue that the Department has experienced over the last two biennia has left it without the financial means to continue providing the existing commercial fisheries the hatchery fish that sustain them. The Director will include in his legislative requests submission a proposal that is designed to raise new revenues from commercial license holders that will help offset the costs of providing commercial salmon fishing opportunities.
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in

Top
Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5 >

Search

Site Links
Home
Our Washington Fishing
Our Alaska Fishing
Reports
Rates
Contact Us
About Us
Recipes
Photos / Videos
Visit us on Facebook
Today's Birthdays
CHUBS
Recent Gallery Pix
hatchery steelhead
Hatchery Releases into the Pacific and Harvest
Who's Online
0 registered (), 939 Guests and 1 Spider online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
John Boob, Lawrence, I'm Still RichG, feyt, Freezeout
11498 Registered Users
Top Posters
Todd 28170
Dan S. 17149
Sol Duc 16138
The Moderator 14486
Salmo g. 13521
eyeFISH 12766
STRIKE ZONE 12107
Dogfish 10979
ParaLeaks 10513
Jerry Garcia 9160
Forum Stats
11498 Members
16 Forums
63773 Topics
645302 Posts

Max Online: 3001 @ 01/28/20 02:48 PM

Join the PP forums.

It's quick, easy, and always free!

Working for the fish and our future fishing opportunities:

The Wild Steelhead Coalition

The Photo & Video Gallery. Nearly 1200 images from our fishing trips! Tips, techniques, live weight calculator & more in the Fishing Resource Center. The time is now to get prime dates for 2018 Olympic Peninsula Winter Steelhead , don't miss out!.

| HOME | ALASKA FISHING | WASHINGTON FISHING | RIVER REPORTS | FORUMS | FISHING RESOURCE CENTER | CHARTER RATES | CONTACT US | WHAT ABOUT BOB? | PHOTO & VIDEO GALLERY | LEARN ABOUT THE FISH | RECIPES | SITE HELP & FAQ |