2019 License News

[bigjohn58]

silverfox wrote:

bigjohn58 wrote:

This right here! I do not have faith in the commission using my donation properly! I'd rather donate my time to actual stream improvement then give away my money and hope its actually being used correctly.

I'm genuinely curious where this notion comes from. Is all of this negative sentiment toward the PFBC from the fact that they stock over Class A water (which I agree is the dumbest thing ever)? Or are there some other actual examples of the commission squandering money?

These statements and sentiments that the PFBC is not to be trusted must be coming from some actual experience or event that I'm not aware of? Really curious if anyone could share what exactly the PAFBC has done to deserve the immediate reaction that they'll "misuse" funds? I mean actual, factual evidence of money mismanagement other than "it's the government".

A lot of it comes from the lack of money that was being put back into the hatchery facilities during the 80s and 90s letting them run down. Lack of reinvesting money back into the commission facilities really upset me. When running a company you have to invest back into it over time so things do not get run down to the point it costs millions to repair.

The lack of being able to have funds for a WCO for Clinton County also upsets me.

What really put me over the edge with the PFBC is knowing that biologists who work for the PFBC purchase their own fish and stock UNSTOCKED Class A streams! I know this has nothing to do with the money end of thigns though. I don't have an issue with stocking over certain Class A streams. I feel there is a time and place for it depending on the size of the stream and location. When a section of stream is designated Class A and is not stocked by the state the biologist who is supposed to be doing the right thing ends up going against everything that is preached just for his own selfish benefit.

 

[tomgamber]

This is a public agency. Aren't those numbers publicly available? Maybe someone could look at them?

 

[allan_s]

bigjohn58 wrote:

silverfox wrote:

bigjohn58 wrote:

This right here! I do not have faith in the commission using my donation properly! I'd rather donate my time to actual stream improvement then give away my money and hope its actually being used correctly.

I'm genuinely curious where this notion comes from. Is all of this negative sentiment toward the PFBC from the fact that they stock over Class A water (which I agree is the dumbest thing ever)? Or are there some other actual examples of the commission squandering money?

These statements and sentiments that the PFBC is not to be trusted must be coming from some actual experience or event that I'm not aware of? Really curious if anyone could share what exactly the PAFBC has done to deserve the immediate reaction that they'll "misuse" funds? I mean actual, factual evidence of money mismanagement other than "it's the government".

A lot of it comes from the lack of money that was being put back into the hatchery facilities during the 80s and 90s letting them run down. Lack of reinvesting money back into the commission facilities really upset me. When running a company you have to invest back into it over time so things do not get run down to the point it costs millions to repair.

it is much worse now than it ever was in the 80s and 90s and got much worse over the last 8 or so years; that is how the PFBC has such a large bank account - fair complaint

The lack of being able to have funds for a WCO for Clinton County also upsets me.

there are many county's w/o a WCO; that is another way they have such a large bank acct - another fair complaint

What really put me over the edge with the PFBC is knowing that biologists who work for the PFBC purchase their own fish and stock UNSTOCKED Class A streams! I know this has nothing to do with the money end of thigns though. I don't have an issue with stocking over certain Class A streams. I feel there is a time and place for it depending on the size of the stream and location. When a section of stream is designated Class A and is not stocked by the state the biologist who is supposed to be doing the right thing ends up going against everything that is preached just for his own selfish benefit.

even if true, definitely not very common and in no way the Commission's fault. That's like saying you hate the Game Commission because you know an employee didn't tag a deer properly - not a fair agency complaint

I don't see any reason here to hate the agency. In fact, I would bet that most people that work there have the same opinions on the lack of spending on infrastructure and lack of employees but the ppl that make the decisions are the Executive Director and Commissioners. Take all complaints straight to them.

I am surprised there isn't a voluntary Stocked Trout permit that could be used to help offset the rising costs of the program and help with infrastructure at hatcheries.

 

[bigjohn58]

allan_s wrote:


A lot of it comes from the lack of money that was being put back into the hatchery facilities during the 80s and 90s letting them run down. Lack of reinvesting money back into the commission facilities really upset me. When running a company you have to invest back into it over time so things do not get run down to the point it costs millions to repair.

it is much worse now than it ever was in the 80s and 90s and got much worse over the last 8 or so years; that is how the PFBC has such a large bank account - fair complaint

The lack of being able to have funds for a WCO for Clinton County also upsets me.

there are many county's w/o a WCO; that is another way they have such a large bank acct - another fair complaint

What really put me over the edge with the PFBC is knowing that biologists who work for the PFBC purchase their own fish and stock UNSTOCKED Class A streams! I know this has nothing to do with the money end of thigns though. I don't have an issue with stocking over certain Class A streams. I feel there is a time and place for it depending on the size of the stream and location. When a section of stream is designated Class A and is not stocked by the state the biologist who is supposed to be doing the right thing ends up going against everything that is preached just for his own selfish benefit.

even if true, definitely not very common and in no way the Commission's fault. That's like saying you hate the Game Commission because you know an employee didn't tag a deer properly - not a fair agency complaint

I don't see any reason here to hate the agency. In fact, I would bet that most people that work there have the same opinions on the lack of spending on infrastructure and lack of employees but the ppl that make the decisions are the Executive Director and Commissioners. Take all complaints straight to them.

I am surprised there isn't a voluntary Stocked Trout permit that could be used to help offset the rising costs of the program and help with infrastructure at hatcheries.[/quote]

I'm not saying I hate the PFBC but I do have trust issues with almost any government agency. I think the PFBC done some good and I've seen a few areas where they have taken small steps to improve wild trout waters and whatnot. I however do not make much money. I do not voluntarily give away my money since my income would probably still have me considered poor. If I was giving away money I'd want to be selfish and make sure it was going towards places I fish. Quite honestly I'd rather just volunteer my time to help improve a stream in my area instead of giving funds to be used anywhere in the state on most any project. My luck my donation would somehow be used for the shad program which I am no way in favor of.

 

[afishinado]

Bigjohn58 wrote:
...I'm not saying I hate the PFBC but I do have trust issues with almost any government agency. I think the PFBC done some good and I've seen a few areas where they have taken small steps to improve wild trout waters and whatnot. I however do not make much money. I do not voluntarily give away my money since my income would probably still have me considered poor. If I was giving away money I'd want to be selfish and make sure it was going towards places I fish. Quite honestly I'd rather just volunteer my time to help improve a stream in my area instead of giving funds to be used anywhere in the state on most any project.

Nice!....Big John. This fund (PFBC) shouldn't be considered the be-all, end-all for lending a helping hand to wild trout streams. Giving money to TU, or a conservancy, or just buying and planting trees with your buddies to improve riparian cover is all good, IMO.

Editorial comment:
The guys that go out there and fish for wild trout all the time and give nothing back except buying a fishin' license every year is what I consider lame.

Go back and read Mo's post (#45) about the "Users and Losers" and talk to me then......

 

[bigjohn58]

afishinado wrote:

Bigjohn58 wrote:
...I'm not saying I hate the PFBC but I do have trust issues with almost any government agency. I think the PFBC done some good and I've seen a few areas where they have taken small steps to improve wild trout waters and whatnot. I however do not make much money. I do not voluntarily give away my money since my income would probably still have me considered poor. If I was giving away money I'd want to be selfish and make sure it was going towards places I fish. Quite honestly I'd rather just volunteer my time to help improve a stream in my area instead of giving funds to be used anywhere in the state on most any project.

Nice!....Big John. This fund (PFBC) shouldn't be considered the be-all, end-all for lending a helping hand to wild trout streams. Giving money to TU, or a conservancy, or just buying and planting trees with your buddies to improve riparian cover is all good, IMO.

Editorial comment:
The guys that go out there and fish for wild trout all the time and give nothing back except buying a fishin' license every year is what I consider lame.

Go back and read Mo's post (#45) about the "Users and Losers" and talk to me then......

When you donate your own time you know the work thats being done. You don't need to rely on someone else getting the job done or if the money you donated is being used properly. I spent a lot of time this year on a very small class A stream that people must go back and party at. Must have picked up well over a 30 pack of cans. There are small things anyone can do if you love your waters. Thing is so few really care. It shouldn't all be about the money which not all of us have. Would I like to donate to TU or other organizations? Sure! Can I? Financially no. Heck I haven't purchased a PA fishing license in my life and probably won't until the day my parents are no longer around. Its been a Christmas gift for me ever since I turned 16.

 

[Swattie87]

afishinado wrote:
Editorial comment:
The guys that go out there and fish for wild trout all the time and give nothing back except buying a fishin' license every year is what I consider lame.

Go back and read Mo's post (#45) about the "Users and Losers" and talk to me then......

afish - I just donated $26.90 to VFTU via the PayPal link on its website. I think I've probably talked enough in this thread, but if you want to talk more, let me know.

Mo - I didn't see a similar link on MCTU's website. If I missed it, let me know where it is. If there isn't one, I'll send a check for $26.90 to the address on the website. Let me know.

PFBC - Still willing to make a $26.90 donation to you as well via the stamp. Just let me know that it's an extra $26.90 windfall for wild Trout in PA, and not a fund reallocation initiative. Or at least in good faith that that's what its intent is.

 

[afishinado]

Swattie87 wrote:

afishinado wrote:
Editorial comment:
The guys that go out there and fish for wild trout all the time and give nothing back except buying a fishin' license every year is what I consider lame.

Go back and read Mo's post (#45) about the "Users and Losers" and talk to me then......

afish - I just donated $26.90 to VFTU via the PayPal link on its website. I think I've probably talked enough in this thread, but if you want to talk more, let me know.

Mo - I didn't see a similar link on MCTU's website. If I missed it, let me know where it is. If there isn't one, I'll send a check for $26.90 to the address on the website. Let me know.

PFBC - Still willing to make a $26.90 donation to you as well via the stamp. Just let me know that it's an extra $26.90 windfall for wild Trout in PA, and not a fund reallocation initiative. Or at least in good faith that that's what its intent is.

Very good. Hopefully the money will be used to help a stream in your area.

 

[GonnaFlyNow]

From what I can tell, the PFCB is experiencing financial issues. Most likely due to pension funding which is the usual suspect. Cuts in employees tell the story. I would expect the donation to be used for various purposes. The PFCB is marketing this as a trout stamp bc this is where the money is. We know from this discussion that many will not be able to or be expected to buy this add on. However, there are many that will be able to buy it. Those that buy it may view this as a way to give back/support something they care about. I will buy one for myself and one for my son. I realize there might not be a one for one allocation of funds to things I support. I also know that when I buy at Orvis that 5 to10% is donated to support projects that I may not ever see in person but I believe they are doing the right thing and so is TU.

It seems that everyone on the board is passionate about fishing in PA. Some people give their time. Some give money. While others give advice which also supports the community and industry. I think the PFCB got this right from a strategic point of view. They targeted the group they thought would respond.

Judging from this post, we responded.

Nice job.

 

[troutbert]

This donation approach won't raise much money. A license price increase is what is needed.

They haven't had one for many years, so an increase is needed just to keep up with the rate of inflation.

Many of the legislators said they would not vote for an increase as John Arway was executive director. John has resigned, so does that mean the legislators are now OK with a license increase?

And if so, when would that happen? For the year 2020?

Does anyone have the scoop on what is happening with the legislators regarding a license increase?

 

[Tups]

Doubtless a license fee increase is warranted and inevitable. In the meantime, the PFBC is attempting to fill the gap with these voluntary permits. The Commission states: "Voluntary permits are designed to help maintain funding levels for several key fishing related programs."

Though I speculate here, the implication seems clear: In the near term, revenues will be moved from these "several key ... programs" to other, unnamed programs. Because labor and hatcheries are by far the most expensive programs, it stands to reason that the funds will be diverted there. It's reasonable to expect the PFBC to manage its funds in the manner it feels most expedient.

As it stands, the mandated trout stamp entitles one to fish for trout without distinction - wild or stocked. That is the agreement we have with our legislators and the Commission. Any attempt to shame fisherman into purchasing the voluntary wild trout stamp is to me repugnant. The attitude of this forum should be one of conciliation and brotherhood. Some may choose to purchase and others may not, for whatever reason. Those who do not intend to purchase should not be required to publicly defend their personal choice. And those who purchase should not publicly question the others' motives nor stoop to impugn their characters. It is, after all, a voluntary contribution.

 

[rrt]

Well, I think we all are being a little chippy (ME INCLUDED) about this. Over time, many of us have said we'd support a wild trout stamp of some kind, and here is one. So, I think it is best to buy one and hope that the FBC uses the very modest amount of money it receives from this voluntary stamp to do things good for wild trout. I bought mine today, then went fishing for wild trout. The trout properly skunked me.

Anyhow, I think we ought to put our money where our mouths have been in the past.

 

[Swattie87]

Mo - Check for $26.90 for MCTU will go out with tomorrow’s mail. Please keep an eye out for it.

 

[timbow]

Ok, so here’s my gripe about the whole thing and why I want to see exactly where the funds will go. I’ve purchased a license every year for the last 20+ years and can count on 2 hands how many times I fished for PFBC stocked trout. So for 20 years the majority of my license fees where used for the hatchery program of which I have no interest in. Now I have the “privelage” to be able to donate to the cause that I do care about in addition to paying for my license, which mostly funds a program I don’t care so much about. So in the end, I pay $75 a year for my license and donation while the guy sitting on his 5 gallon bucket fishes every day of stocked season and keeps EVERY fish he catches pays $45, cause you know he isn’t donating a dime. This all starts to sound like some form of socialism to me so forgive me if I want to see exactly where my donation goes.

In my opinion, the real solution to this problem is to significantly increase the cost of the trout stamp. Doing this will cause many of the guys who depend on stocked fisheries not want to pay the additional money and they will find other, non-trout species, to fish for. Thus, the demand for stocked trout will decline and the PFBC will be able to direct a larger portion of the trout stamp funds toward wild trout, as they would not face the opposition from the white truck chasers since they were “priced out”. Hatchery expenses are the problem and until they figure out a way to either 1. Reduce cost or 2. Reduce demand they will continue to struggle to direct ANY money towards anything other than the hatchery program and overhead.

 

[PennKev]

timbow wrote:
In my opinion, the real solution to this problem is to significantly increase the cost of the trout stamp. Doing this will cause many of the guys who depend on stocked fisheries not want to pay the additional money and they will find other, non-trout species, to fish for. Thus, the demand for stocked trout will decline and the PFBC will be able to direct a larger portion of the trout stamp funds toward wild trout, as they would not face the opposition from the white truck chasers since they were “priced out”.

I agree that raising the trout stamp price could eventually strangle the demand for stocked trout, but in the meantime, the truck chasers who remain WILL DEMAND MORE STOCKING if they are paying significantly more. In the short term, groups like TAP (remember them?) will be out for blood, and pressure the commission to cater to their demands anytime wild trout are put ahead of stocking. After all, they paid for the stamp too.

That's a fight I can do without.

Buy a voluntary wild trout stamp. When some hill jack cries about all the attention wild trout get you can point to your voluntary permit and tell him that you paid for that, not more stocked trout.

 

[Swattie87]

PennKev wrote:
Buy a voluntary wild trout stamp. When some hill jack cries about all the attention wild trout get you can point to your voluntary permit and tell him that you paid for that, not more stocked trout.

Or did you actually just pay for more stocked Trout? You won’t be able to know for sure until the math comes out in the laundry.

Haha...Sorry Kev...Your presentation was perfect and drag free, I couldn’t resist. I know I’m beating a dead horse at this point. I’m ok with folks handling the stamp as they see fit. I’ve donated two stamps worth in the last 24 hours to causes I know will benefit WT in PA.

I’ve somewhat warmed to the idea that if funds will be pulled from WT to subsidize stocking anyway, buying the stamp will lessen that impact. But fundamentally, that isn’t right either.

 

[PennKev]

It comes down to how many times each of us is willing to pay $26 without seeing an increase in wild trout related programs by the PAFBC. I'm willing to do it once or twice before I accuse the commission of cheating us. I can afford to take that risk.

 

[rrt]

I used the wrong word when I said "chippy." I should have used the term "nit picking" for what we (INCLUDING ME) had been saying.

And, even if the money from the stamp goes toward stocking, it might help keep the hatchery fish chasers and non-catch-and-release anglers from fishing and killing fish on wild trout streams.

Anyhow, I think the stamp's worth a try.

 

[falcon]

Just curious but why is the Wild Trout Stamp twice the price of the others. Anyway I will probably buy the WT stamp as I fish wild trout water 95% of the time.

 

[salvelinusfontinalis]

I'll be buying it in January with my license.
A wonderful idea.