WDF&W to Eliminate Steelhead Fishing in Puget Sound Drainages?

[donman]

Uh, oh! Thanks to a $20 to $30 million in shortfall in funds, The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife is faced with making some super deep cuts in upcoming years, several of which would have profound impacts on anglers and hunters in the state…

Department Director, Phil Anderson, said cuts might include 20 wildlife enforcement jobs, closure of seven to 11 fish hatcheries, the elimination of steelhead fishing in Puget Sound tributaries and closure of some of the agency’s 700 public access areas.

Say what?!

http://www.tri-cityherald.com/2010/11/0 ... z14iyeGyV6
State proposes hunting, fishing license increase
By ALLEN THOMAS, The Vancouver Columbian

State wildlife officials have drafted a blueprint for the first across-the-board increase in hunting and fishing license fees in 14 years.

A resident freshwater fishing license would jump from $26 to $29.50 and a combination freshwater-saltwater-shellfish resident license from $48.20 to $54.25. An elk license would increase from $45.20 to $57, while a deer license would decrease from $45.20 to $44.90.

While most licenses would cost more, fees for youth, seniors and disabled veterans would decrease.

Increases in commercial fishing fees also are proposed.

The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife is facing a $10 million to $20 million shortfall in state General Fund money plus about a $10 million reduction in the state Wildlife Account, which mostly comes from license revenue, in the 2011-13 budget cycle.

Phil Anderson, department director, said cuts might include 20 wildlife enforcement jobs, closure of seven to 11 fish hatcheries, elimination of steelhead fishing in Puget Sound tributaries and closure of some of the agency's 700 public access areas.

Anderson is making appearances around the state explaining the potential license increases and seeking reaction. New license fees require action by the state Legislature.

"We've got to have relatively broad-base support or the Legislature isn't going to buy it and we're going to be faced with a whole bunch of cuts,'' Anderson told the Columbia River recreational and commercial advisory groups in Vancouver recently.

The department is looking at a variety of ways to increase revenue to maintain its programs status quo, he said.

Other revenue measures, besides a license fee increase, are:

* Switching the money from saltwater fishing, shellfish and razor clam licenses from the General Fund (where it can be used for any purpose) to the state Wildlife Account. That would help to the tune of $3 million a biennium.

* Switching commercial license fees from the General Fund to the department. That would add about $2 million.

* Adding a commercial fishing license "administrative fee'' of either $70 or $105 per license.

* Charging a fee for Hydraulics Permit Approvals, the environmental review required to work in state waterways. The fee would provide $3.3 million.

* Creating an "Explore Washington Pass'' with the state Department of Natural Resources.

The pass would be required to use the 5 million acres of lands managed by the departments of Fish and Wildlife and Natural Resources.

Anderson said the pass would cost $5 for hunting or fishing license buyers and $40 for others age 18 and older.

One- and three-day passes would be available.

State lawmakers early this year approved a 10 percent surcharge on hunting and fishing license fees, but that ends on June 30, 2011.

An $8.75 annual Columbia River salmon-steelhead endorsement was initiated in 2010.

That would continue, but drop to $7.10 for youth under this proposal.

Anderson said the last general fee increase was in 1996.

The proposed fee increases got a mixed reaction from the advisory groups.



Read more: http://www.tri-cityherald.com/2010/11/0 ... z14xRuS4Ku

[Anonymous]

Not that it shouldn't be discussed all over the forum and everywhere else for that matter.

Same Discussion in the Fresh Water Section

[Anonymous]

Its all talk. It might ,we might,perhaps,maybe?? This talk is indicative of politicians. They may be closing some older hatcheries because I just did a bid a while back on a new state of the art fish hatchery on the upper Cedar River. I bid also on a new hatchery on Blue Creek. As for the 20 WDFW cops who cares? They are never out doing much (or at least I never see any).Let the state balk all it wants. Its what Govt does best.They can make licenses more money but why ? there are no cops to enforce it. Some will buy others wont knowing the gamies are few between. There are far more important worries for me to deal with.JMO

[donman]

Not that it shouldn't be discussed all over the forum and everywhere else for that matter.

Same Discussion in the Fresh Water Section

I guess I need to explore a little more outside of the river section.

As for the Officers getting laid off, I feel sorry for them, but yeah they're never around when you need them. And as for them closing down hatcheries, that would suck if they did. I think this state just needs to budget their resources better, not that I'm a Dave Ramsey, but these guys are supposed to be the experts right?

[scott080379]

I'm moving to Canada

[kzoo]

I'm thinking its a scare, they just want something to justify the increase in license fees. River fishing promotes a lot sales in Washington, they'd be shooting themselves in the foot.

[racfish]

Kzoo you said what I tried to write in a very few words. I totally agree with you. Its the states justification to charge us all more.The state cant be too broke. Were doing a measure at the Govs Mansion in Olympia. So somewhere theres money!

[chefjake99]

I'm moving to Canada

I'll be right behind you Scott... Maybe Alaska.

[mallard83]

I'm thinking its a scare, they just want something to justify the increase in license fees. River fishing promotes a lot sales in Washington, they'd be shooting themselves in the foot.

Agreed. It is typical of this state. To much spending on pointless issues.

All this state is about is TAX TAX TAX, SPEND SPEND SPEND, TAX TAX TAX, SPEND SPEND SPEND, TAX TAX TAX, SPEND SPEND SPEND, TAX TAX TAX, SPEND SPEND SPEND, TAX TAX TAX, SPEND SPEND SPEND, TAX TAX TAX, SPEND SPEND SPEND, TAX TAX TAX, SPEND SPEND SPEND, TAX TAX TAX, SPEND SPEND SPEND, TAX TAX TAX, SPEND SPEND SPEND, TAX TAX TAX, SPEND SPEND SPEND, TAX TAX TAX, SPEND SPEND SPEND, TAX TAX TAX, SPEND SPEND SPEND, [cursing]

[dogfish7]

License fees and anyting that is sportsmen related needs to be allocated directly to supporting fisheries. Gillnetting needs to be outlawed. Netting in any river needs to be outlawed. Native tribes need to allocate funds from thier businesses (gambling, tobacco, ect..) to support thier harvesting of fish on thier lands. All rivers and bodies of waters need to be property of Washington residents, open to all at a license fee. Japan needs to pay use for harvesting our fish. Poachers need pay hefty fines and lose thier licenses (no jail time, cost US money). Seals need to be harvested and / or controlled. Thats my plan. Enough is enough. No more TAX, no more SPEND, the bank is DRY, and hey I'm a Moderate!:rambo:

[Marc Martyn]

All this aggressive talk about that the fees collected should go the the WDFW and not to the General Fund. It already does. The following is from the WDFW website:

Where do license fees go? What percentage goes into the State General Fund or other funds NOT for use by WDFW?
79% goes to the State Wildlife Account 13% of that money goes to Other WDFW controlled accounts 5% goes to the General Fund

Out of the money that goes to the General Fund, how much is appropriated back to the Department?

As an example: In fiscal year 2002, the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife deposited $47,099,799 as revenues into the General Fund and spent $90,389,524 as expenditures from the General Fund.


It appears that if the department were to rely on just the funds from license fees, the entire department would fall 50% short of it's current income. How is that going to help?