2019 License News

[PennKev]

Since I did not see this posted, at least not recently...

License News

Hope everyone walks the walk and purchases the voluntary "permits."

 

[ryansheehan]

Thanks for posting, I read the article and then some comments. BrianinPA has an interesting comment....smdh.

 

[Dave_W]

Will be interesting to see how well such voluntary "permits" work out for PFBC next year. Thanks for the heads-up.

 

[poopdeck]

I'm not walking any walk. I will not be paying any voluntary tax for fish specific stamps imposed by bureaucrats. Thankfully the PFBC does not have the power to tax or we would have European style fishing. I do wish the legislators would just raise the price of a fishing license and be done with it.

We don't need any more special regulations nor any more special stamps to fish certain areas for certain fish. Let's just manage all the resources that we have for all the people and let's stop pandering to, or targeting, certain sub groups of anglers. Most importantly let's properly fund this effort through a reasonable across the board license increase.

 

[jifigz]

I, for one, don't think that this is a bad idea. If you can't raise the license fee you can always graciously ask those to donate for what they care about. And seriously it will only be more serious anglers that are going to opt to donate money. I'd consider donating if I was 100% sure the money would be appropriated for what they tell me..

 

[PennKev]

jifigz wrote:
I'd consider donating if I was 100% sure the money would be appropriated for what they tell me..

Well, we are already trusting that the current Erie stamps are handled that way, no?

I'd also like a more specific summary of what and where the money will be used but I will likely go ahead and get the WT permit. I feel better about a voluntary WT permit than I do about a trout stamp which goes directly to put & take stocking.

 

[Swattie87]

If it actually costs $26.90 from every wild Trout angler to properly maintain that resource, then go ahead and charge for it for those who use it. I’m a heavy user of wild Trout streams. I’d gladly pay $26.90 for a WT stamp to fish those waters.

That said, I don’t get it. Wild Trout don’t cost anything to make. (Actually by spending less on stocking, you can arguably make more.) Yeah, surveys and population studies cost money to help manage the WT resource, but I imagine that cost is minuscule in comparison to the Trout stocking program. I suspect that this may simply come down to the belief WT anglers are more likely to pay an increase in licensing cost, if so applied, than the one or two day a year, opening day angler crowd. I don’t like that, and I’d too be skeptical of where and what the money is going to.

Bottom line for me. I’m not paying it unless it’s made mandatory. Which will probably happen. I’m fine with that. I just hope the WT stamp would be enforced in that case, and the extra funds from such a stamp go directly to managing WT...And not to help subsidize stocking. My first vote on what the funds should be used for...Hire a data analyst and make ALL stream survey data available online.

In the meantime, I’ll find a different way to contribute $26.90 worth of my funds and/or time to the betterment of our wild Trout waters in 2019.

 

[nymphingmaniac]

all good points. In addition to surveys and population studies already mentioned, PFBC designs habitat projects for organizations and spends money on projects. They support permit applications etc.
I'm not claiming they spend enough etc...., just that they have more expenses associated with promoting and managing WT than some realize.

As this started out... I and others put forth this idea. I'm in. May be we wanted it to be compulsory, but buying into this program would send a powerful message about how the people of the commonwealth support WT. Look at it this way, if only 2% of license holders buy in how would this look? This could justify the stocking first mentality. Others have a good point that a better description how the money will be used would increase enthusiasm/confidence.

I say let's not kill this seed before it germinates. If we don't see or hear how these monies were used to increase WT management after two years, then reevaluate.

 

[Fly-Swatter]

WT do cost money. It costs money to do stream surveys to ID WT populations, to protect resources, to improve habitat (ie, remediate point source pollution), to patrol and enforce laws, etc.

Another point: whatever charitable thing we choose to patronize, our money will never be 100% efficiently used. This is true of government and private recipients. The gray area is determining what is meant by "efficient" use of our dollars.

IMO, a combination of government and non-government (TU, et al) efforts are required to preserve and enhance our WT resource. It is, of course, up to each of us to determine what we can afford. The core question for me is how motivated are we?

Also, FWIW, license fee increase is long overdue.

 

[Swattie87]

So here’s what I’m skeptical/fearful of…Through an example…

For sake of easy math (I don’t know the actual numbers) let’s assume this:

In 2018, suppose the PFBC allocated $1,000,000 from its general license sale funds to its wild Trout resources/programs.

In 2019, the PFBC has committed to allocate 100% of the revenue generated from the sale of voluntary wild Trout stamps to its wild Trout resources/programs. Say in 2019 that generates an additional $1,000,000, again, just for purposes of the example. In that scenario, as long as $2,000,000 is then being allocated for wild Trout resources, I’m all for it, and would support it by purchasing the stamp. What I’m fearful of however, is that the PFBC would use the $1,000,000 generated from the WT stamp for WT resources, and then reallocate the $1,000,000 previously devoted to it from the general license sale funds, to other purposes…The struggling to stay afloat stocking program for example. In that example, they’re telling you the truth…They’re using the WT stamp money for WT resources, but they’re moving money behind the scenes.

This ties back to my concern previously…That the PFBC (correctly I believe) figures that WT anglers are more likely to be willing to pay for an increase in license costs than the Opening Day crowd. You don’t see a voluntary $26.90 “Stocked Trout” stamp targeted toward stocked Trout anglers to help with the costs of the stocking program do you? I’m just struggling to believe that this isn’t just a gimmick, and a game of hide the money.

PFBC – If you’re reading this, show me the math. If there’s no funny business going on behind the scenes, I’ll gladly support it and make the $26.90 voluntary WT donation. I doubt they’ll be willing, and/or able to show that however.

 

[PennKev]

Swattie87 wrote:
What I’m fearful of however, is that the PFBC would use the $1,000,000 generated from the WT stamp for WT resources, and then reallocate the $1,000,000 previously devoted to it from the general license sale funds, to other purposes…The struggling to stay afloat stocking program for example. In that example, they’re telling you the truth…They’re using the WT stamp money for WT resources, but they’re moving money behind the scenes.

In that situation, we don't notice any increase in wild trout related activities/spending after a couple years then the jig is up for the PAFBC. Not saying it isn't possible, but it is extremely short sighted on the part of the commission.

On the other hand, if we contribute to a wild trout specific fund, there should be some degree of accountability over it and we'll know for certain there is at least X amount of dollars going directly to wild fisheries. In a scenario where the PAFBC needs to inject cash into the stocking program, having a separate fund dedicated to wild fish may be the thing that prevents wild trout projects from being cut. There is always the risk of something shady happening when money is involved, but that's already true for our license dollars.

 

[Acristickid]

The cost. Ha. Hilarious.

I will spend more than $26 at happy hour. Or lunch today. This old argument is stupid.

Yea, $300 rods, $300 waders.

Yea, the point is wasting money. Got it.

Not gonna do it - not gonna buy into the prohibitive cost. It’s bad it’s bad. Wouldn’t be prudent.

There’s a thousand points of light out there and it’s worth more $26

 

[Fredrick]

I'm skeptic would definitely contribute if I knew if all the money went to the areas you are donating . I don't think most are worried about the money as more the principle . Does anyone know what they did with the money from the save our susky program did they allot all the money raised to the program or did they use it towards their budget and the susky ?

I would love to see a fund for our Conservation Officers they are under staffed and under equipped .

 

[silverfox]

Just bought my license. $81.60 total. Resident Annual, Trout Salmon permit, button, Voluntary Habitat/Waterways Conservation Permit and the Voluntary Wild Trout & Enhanced Waters Permit (I don't fish for Musky, rarely bass and probably wont set foot on the erie shore or it's tribs again).

I'm actually glad there's a way to contribute a bit more for the things that interest me personally. Going on good faith that they'll use the funds from the voluntary permits for what they're intended. I'm not one of those who gripe about the PFBC wasting money or that the big bad gov is blowing funds. I know and have known people who work for the commission and nobody can tell me that they aren't in it for the right reasons. Passionate, dedicated folks who work behind the scenes in a thankless job to protect and enhance the things we cherish.

I've been at this long enough to personally recognize the positive impact their efforts have had in my lifetime alone. It's worth it to me and in my opinion.

 

[timbow]

Guys, I would suggest hanging tight for a few days before purchasing the voluntary wild trout permit. Several guys are working with PFBC for clarification on how the monies will be allocated and have been told that PFBC will be providing more information shortly.

 

[RLeep2]

In a general sense, I would rather spend my money on helping to fund a movement to convert the PA Legislature from full time to part time. I think this would be a more direct means of addressing the root problem rather than just the symptoms.

But that isn't going to happen, so I'll buy the permits. By and large, I trust the Commission and support their efforts and goals. I do not see them as some bureaucratic entity trying to accrue money and power to achieve a state of maximum bloat. That's more the Legislature's role...

 

[afishinado]

No need to wait for me. I currently have a multi-year license, but just purchased the voluntary wild trout permit along with a donation to the SOS > Save Our Susky program.

Like the Kid pointed out a few posts ago, brown bag it or skip one happy hour or maybe a movie or ballgame next year to pay for the permit. I can tell you that burger and beer or sports ticket you buy will do nothing at all to help support our streams.

Decide to give a little back to the sport you love and help out some of the places you fish or maybe even someday hope to fish.

Plus clean water and a clean environment benefits everyone, not just anglers.

If we see the permit monies being misspent in some way than I'll be one of the first to speakout and withhold my dollars and support.

 

[timbow]

afishinado wrote:
No need to wait for me. I currently have a multi-year license, but just purchased the voluntary wild trout permit along with a donation to the SOS > Save Our Susky program.

Like the Kid pointed out a few posts ago, brown bag it or skip one happy hour or maybe a movie or ballgame next year to pay for the permit. I can tell you that burger and beer or sports ticket you buy will do nothing at all to help support our streams.

Decide to give a little back to the sport you love and help out some of the places you fish or maybe even someday hope to fish.

Plus clean water and a clean environment benefits everyone, not just anglers.

If we see the permit monies being misspent in some way than I'll be one of the first to speakout and withhold my dollars and support.

I will be waiting for more information, particularly clarification on what "Enhanced Waters" is. If it's Keystone Select or Delayed Harvest I'll be keeping my $26 in my pocket as I can guarantee you that if those programs are part of this fund they will receive 95% of the funds

 

[JerryCoviello]

afishinado,

is this like the conservation stamp that Montana and Wyoming charge for their license?

 

[sarce]

Think some people are missing the key word. VOLUNTARY. Don't want to pay it, then don't - no need to grandstand and slam PFBC in the process