Here we go.
WDFW is sucking the taxpayers tut while they do less!!!!


WDFW Seeks Additional Funding Through Increased License Fees
Disgruntled: Opposition to Agency’s Proposed Cost Increases Voiced at Public Meeting Held at Centralia College

Posted: Thursday, August 25, 2016 9:57 am
By Jordan Nailon / jnailon@chronline.com
More than 40 citizens piled into a cramped public meeting hosted by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife at Centralia College on Tuesday in order to discuss proposed increases to hunting and fishing license costs.
The topic of rising license costs generates strong feelings in outdoors enthusiasts, and the meeting was attended by established and aspiring politicians alike, including state Sen. John Braun, of Centralia, state Rep. Ed Orcutt, R-Kalama, and Lewis County Commission candidate Bob Bozarth. Further signifying the importance of the meeting, Director of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Jim Unsworth was also in attendance.
The WDFW is asking for the increase in license fees in order to curtail a deficit of funds for its programs. The agency implied that without the fee increases, hatcheries and fisheries would likely be shut down, regulation enforcement efforts would shrink and hunters would continue to see access to traditional hunting areas dwindle.
“We’d really like to maintain our current level of service and even expand on that if we can. In order to do that we’re going to need more money,” said WDFW representative John Long in a presentation at the beginning of the two-hour meeting.
Long’s presentation noted that anglers and hunters have always footed the majority of the WDFW operating bill. However, trends over the last three decades have led to fewer anglers and hunters in comparison to the state’s population. That means that each license holder has assumed an increasing financial burden in order to keep pace with the department’s needs. Long noted that while the increased burden on recreational hunters and fishers is not necessarily fair, the WDFW and state Legislature have so far not been able to come up with a better solution.
While the proposed license fee changes are numerous and vary greatly across the board, some of the most popular licenses are set to increase substantially. For instance, a saltwater, freshwater and shellfish combination license would increase from $55.35 to $64.92. That license would also require anglers to purchase a separate catch record card for salmon and steelhead at $17 each. Any angler targeting salmon on the Columbia River or its tributaries would also be required to purchase a Columbia River endorsement for $9.75.
For clam diggers, annual razor clam licenses would increase from $14.10 to $24, while a three-day pass would increase from $9.70 to $18.50.
Hunters would also see an increase of about 10 percent across the board for licenses if the proposals were to be passed as they are currently drafted. A big game license for deer, elk, bear and cougar would increase from $95.50 to $104.85, while a big game/small game combination
license would increase from $117.50 to $129.05. Turkey and migratory bird hunting would cost $87.29, compared to its current price tag of $73.30, while a deer and turkey tag would increase from $82.80 to $90.83.
The WDFW noted that all of those prices are tabulated to be “out the door,” costs that include dealer and transaction fees.
The public meeting in Centralia was set up on short notice at the request of Braun. He said the issue came to his attention when he saw an email noting that the Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission had already voted to approve the proposals.
“They’d already had a few meetings, but I said, ‘Wait a minute. None of my constituents live within 100 miles of any of those places,’ ” said Braun. “I was curious about what the WDFW had in mind.”
Braun said he had a good idea of how many local residents would feel about the proposed increases, and he wanted to make sure they were given an opportunity to have their voices heard.
“I don’t think anybody’s going to be happy with fee increases, whether they be fishing or hunting,” said Braun, who noted that he does not believe the current proposals will pass the Legislature without an increase in public support. “On the positive side, we’re all intent on protecting Washington’s assets, so I think this is a nice start, but it’s only a start.”
LeeRoy Wisner, of Adna, agreed with Braun’s take on the issue.
“I think this is a wish list. I don’t think they’ll get it. Maybe half of it, but not all of it,” said Wisner.
Asked if he believes there may be a risk of pricing people out of outdoors recreation, Wisner said, “Sure there is. They’re gonna go to Alaska. Or they’re gonna poach.”
Jon Vigre, of Silver Creek, was most upset by the dramatic difference in cost increases between recreational licenses and commercial licenses. He estimated that the recreational anglers would take on an increase of “20 fold” over the commercial contingent.
“We help raise the fish and then they net them. It’s very frustrating,” said Vigre.
He added that, “With this big of an increase they’re going to lose anglers even faster than they have been.”
Vigre blames the diminishing number of anglers on an increasingly convoluted set of regulations, elevating costs and a dearth of fish to be caught.
Those same concerns were captured by WDFW Wildlife Director Eric Gardner during the meeting, but in regard to hunting.
“There's concern about the overall cost of being able to maintain a hunting lifestyle and being able to recruit youth,” said Gardner, who was reciting gripes voiced to him by members of the public during a breakout brainstorming session.
Near the end of the meeting, WDFW Director Jim Unsworth said that he thought the meeting went “pretty good.”
“Whenever you talk to sportsmen about increasing fees, you know nobody likes paying more money,” noted Unsworth.
However, Unsworth was steadfast in his claim that without an immediate increase in funding for his department there would be an inevitable loss of services.
“We just don’t have enough funds to continue our programs,” said Unsworth.
Unsworth admitted that, “There’s always a fear of pricing ourselves out of recreation,” and noted a few concessions that the WDFW made in their proposal to help soften the financial blow to hunters and anglers.
Specifically, Unsworth noted that the age for seniors, who receive a discount on their licenses, would be lowered to 65 years old. Additionally, many of the fees for children 15 years old and younger would be lowered or eliminated. Unsworth said those concessions will help families continue their traditions in the outdoors.
“Whenever you see a fee increase, you usually see a dropoff in participation, but it usually comes back,” said Unsworth.
The WDFW director went on to call the proposals a “first cut,” adding that, “There’s lots of places where this package can be shaped between now and June, or whenever we get this through.”
Hitting on a topic touched on by Long earlier in the meeting, Unsworth acknowledged that all WDFW activities improve the economic station and quality of life for all Washingtonians, not just outdoors enthusiasts. For that reason, he said, his department is hoping to find a way forward in the future where non-hunters and non-anglers will be asked to foot more of the WDFW operation bill.
“That’s a conversation that we would like to have with the general population,” said Unsworth. He noted that currently a portion of the WDFW operating budget already comes from the state general fund, which is a pool of general taxpayer dollars. He admitted, though, that under that system, “Sportsmen get double hit, but of course they are the ones interested in what we’re offering.”
Unsworth added, “The people in Washington really value their hunting and fishing and wildlife in general. These are the people who've been supporting us forever.”
Additional information on the Washington’s Wild Future proposals can be found online at http://wdfw.wa.gov/wildfuture/

Its like the WDFW aren't even in these meetings. They never directly answer the questions surrounding recreational license compared to commercial license cost-to-burden. We foot the bill, they take the fish. A commercial license should be upwards of $25,000 a year. Not $1500. That would weed a lot of them out, and it would be a start to paying their fair share. I'll pay more than $150 for my stuff, if they pay $25,000.

ahh, now I remember why I quit hunting.....$18 for a license and $10 for the deer tag was just becoming too much

Hatcheries might be shut down? Who the fvck cares, we can't fish for our hatchery fish as is!

"Keep opportunities the same or even expand" yeah that I'd like to see. The only expanded opportunities I've gotten from this states jacked up fisheries are an expansion of free time to do chores around the house.

Keeping in mind also a "fee increase" generally means a slight increase to fill the gaps....

The proposal they are offering to go from 55$ to 80$+ for a combo and a salmon card represents an increase of 33%. ARE YOU FVCKING SERIOUS?

The beuraucrats will get raises and the opportunity will continue to diminish. May as well enact another property and gas tax increase too... There IS a deficit after all.

I expect nothing less from this State.

Remember the old salmon stamp....that fee was absorbed into the current license fee structure and is teased out to fund the Puget Sound Recreational Fisheries Enhancement program - it generates somewhere over $1 million for what used to be the blackmouth program and currently funds some salmon production for Puget Sound.

I guess we don't get credit for that buried fee and now we're looking at another salmon "stamp".

It's not hard to see how decades of democrats in charge will f.uck up a wet dream. It's becoming more and more pathetic watching this state. They've been completely impotent when dealing with the Indians and outright contemptuous to the rest of us.

F.uck this state. They raise the rates and I am done supporting these stupid shltstains in Olympia. I spend $600 in permits and applications annually for myself and my children and it's obvious that's not enough apparently.

I bought a place in Alaska because I saw the writing on the wall and I figured the way the democrats do everything it's guaranfukingteed that it'll be ruined. Not only will they destroy whatever they touch, the bastards will make you pay for their fukups.

Suggestions:

1. Look at decreasing a WDFW work force, maybe start from the Top down, not in the areas that should be kept.

2. How about a commercial license increase AND a separate license for EACH species they fish on???? i.e., Chinook, Coho, Chum, herring, etc.

3. New director, came in like a Lion.....now acting like a Lamb, need to get some "backbone", when dealing with the tribes.

4. Need to get back to being OPEN to the general public, emailing has come to a big slowdown, some of us call it "hiding", won't answer emails seems to be a new WDFW way of dealing with the public.

5. Instead of asking for "new monies", learn how to spend monies that have been setting in a fund for 24+ years.....Wynoochee, all this time and sportsmen and others have gotten the "short end of the stick". Wynoochee mitigation calls for increasing COHO and Steelhead, and its not even State money.....just need to stay on task and get it done.

6. Need to "take a lesson" from boarding States, make the non-resident license purchasers pay a greater license fee.....non-resident have been "cutting a fat hog", on license fees.

Have a good day!!!! Time to go stand on my rock and practice casting!!!!

i've been calling this for years. we had a puget sound salmon stamp(to pay for blackmouth programs like mcallister creek and percival cove that have long since been shut down), "warm water enhancement", etc that was all rolled into the license. i knew they'd be looking to double up on those fees, i sure hate being right sometimes.

when i think about it, most of the "fun" fisheries i used to enjoy have all been closed down, places like capitol lake where the public isn't even allowed to target a 100% artificial run any more, but we still plant rivers like the coweeman with no access. WDFW has gotten so ridiculous it makes me sick.

The legislation which established the blackmouth stamp (thanks to the late Sen. Oke) was never fully met by WDFW; that is, the Department never met the production requirements. Then it was rolled into the general license followed by an attempt to significantly reduce or eliminate the program entirely. Fortunately Sen. Oke was still in office and told WDFW that if they moved forward with such reductions he would reduce the license cost by the amount of the salmon stamp. That threat got their attention. Well, the good Senator is gone now and WDFW has gradually been reducing the program output and age mix essentially relying upon their numbers showing much lower contributions to that fishery - without a firm handle on why that is happening and addressing the underlying problem(s).

Now, about the proposed license fee increases. As we are clearly moving to a pay to play relationship due to ongoing and Draconian cuts in General Fund money I want to add a couple of thoughts:

1. All state sales taxes on hunting and fishing gear needs to go to the Wildlife Account.

2. Commercial license/landing fees need to go to the Wildlife Account and within each type of fishery must be commensurate with the cost imposed upon recreational users. As an example, the commercials pay literally pennies per pound for Puget Sound crab in a four month season while the recreational crabbers pay several dollars per pound with most of that effort during a two month season. Did you all notice that the P.S. crab endorsement is proposed to increase by 111% - yes, more than double its current $8.75 cost and that doesn't include the increase in the shellfish license while there is only a small increase in P.S. commercial crab licenses and no increase in landing fees. And don't forget that the original endorsement at $3.00 was proposed by and supported by recreational crabbers to obtain harvest info which the department did not have nor (so they claimed) had the money to gather. Note to self: no good turn goes unpunished. And how is that crab money being expended? The recreational crab advisory group is alive on paper but moribund and that group, unlike the other two advisory groups linked to endorsements, does not have any budget/expenditure oversight. Why is that? Where is the money going and why is there a need for a 111% increase?

3. No Wildlife Account money should be expended on non-revenue generating activities. Got a bear in your garbage can problem? The response comes out of GF money. Want to count fence post lizards? Comes out of the GF. Want to enforce the new trafficing in endangered wildlife law (an unfunded initiative) - it comes out of GF money. Wolf management? The GF.

4. No recreational fishing enhancement funds should be utilized unless the expenditure has a direct positive impact primarily for recreational fishers. Period. Habitat projects should be funded by the general public given that it occurred primarily as a result of development by and for the general public.

Spot on !

You're kidding me,right?

Don't by a license and just do your thing anyways if you want or just pretty much give up. I bought my shellfish this year and that's it, the rest just seems like to much of a scam for very little pidgen holed opportunity. I'll keep buying my hunting license until that does not make sense either.

I can dig clams and get oysters close to home with decent opportunities, but the "Asian Train" from pierce and king counties is quickly wiping all the beaches out around here just like they did in Case Inlet. They show up by the car loads and dig 5 gallon bucket fulls, double fisted untill the beach is wiped out. Then they cut all the eel grass and pick the beach clean of sea lettuce and kelp, then move onto the next beach and do the same thing. F&W can write all the felony tickets they want but it has no impact.

After a season of them it's like a bull dozer turned over the beach and your lucky to find a small horse clam or cockerel. They will completely wipe out a butterclam population in no time at all.

not trying to offend any Asian people but you even know what I mean..