Correct but point being there are tons of opportunities that don’t come from a stocking truck and some of the best early summer smallmouth streams are stocked trout streams. Either way I don’t see why giving anglers the option to decide if they personally want to fund and utilize stocked invasive trout species would offend or anger anyone.
Everyone knows there are plenty of fishing opportunities that don't involve the put-and-take artificial trout fishery. No one denied that. I am not offended by the option to decide if you personally want to fund the stockies or not. Actually, you already mostly have that option and that is whether you buy a trout stamp or not. If you buy one, then you are funding it, if you don't buy one, then you largely are not funding it. No one cares if you buy one, just don't trout fish otherwise or fish in bodies of water stocked with trout. The reason why you are not able to fish in places with stocked trout (or wild trout) if you don't have one is because enforcement would be too difficult. Any angler could say "no, I am not fishing for trout. I am targeting XXXXX and these stupid trout keep biting." As long as an angler isn't caught with fish you couldn't enforce it. So, anywhere trout are stocked (or wild), you shouldn't be able to fish. Also, if you feel 100% of the trout stamp money is spent on stocking, then how did the PFBC implement it's wild trout surveys in the 70's, way before I could donate money with a voluntary trout permit.
A significant portion of the funding from the PFBC stems from federal money. It is not all license sales. Don't forget, the money raised also fixes dams, raises hatchery WW fish to restore populations, (all nonnative basically), do biologist reports, etc. Plus, don't forget the PFBC massive payroll. Yes, dams and stocking of WW fish is also controversial. Either way, what you do to make someone happy won't make everyone happy. Honestly, it is what it is and I think the PFBC does a pretty good job.
As far as the whitetail/duck hunting thing I will say this......I am an avid waterfowl hunter. Yeah, Delta Waterfowl does quite a lot to ensure that the Eastern Mallard and the resident goose populations continue to do well. Just a tid-bit of information, those two populations didn't exist 100 years ago. They exist because of people. We did not have breeding mallards in Pennsylvania historically, and the lion's share of the birds were midwest and western flyway birds. Our eastern mallards that breed here, from Canada down through PA and a little further south, are descendants of farmed mallards from Europe. So, yeah, human beings bolstered the Eastern Mallard population by releasing farmed, domesticated strains of mallards. Our birds are genetically different from the mallards of the pacific and Mississippi fly ways. The Eastern mallard is seriously declining and has been for the past 20 years and a lot of money is being spent to help correct the problem, both by DU and Delta Waterfowl. So, we as a group of waterfowl hunters are trying to save birds that historically weren't here, weren't native, etc. I don't see how that is any different than, let's say, Penns Creek suddenly had massive die off's. Since those browns aren't native we should forget about em, right?
Trout stocking and the system isn't perfect, but it is a heritage and a tradition. Things are slowly changing, but slowly, and that is both good and bad. It takes people time to change and not feel so threatened as it happens.
