PFBC license fee proposal - Senate Bill 1168

Never mind...I read the Banner on the website and see who holds what position.
 
Hook_Jaw wrote:
It's crazy should be a separate license for those who don't fish stocked waters. I don't fish a stocked section of a stream once the entire year.
Click to expand...

Not that I disagree. As I stated in an earlier thread....with the current lack of wardens this would be impossible to enforce so everyone pays the same license fees.

Ron
 
afishinado wrote:
Fishing license fees have not been raised since 2005. I can't think of many/anything consumer item that has not increased for so long. A license increase is certainly needed and expected.

The license cost is more than reasonable in PA, and is actually a bargain when compared to other forms of recreation and entertainment. One day of golf, skiing, a sporting event, a concert, etc. will likely cost more than a whole year of fishing.

I spent around $30 for a fishing license/trout stamp this year. Just thinking back on my last fishing trip, that day alone I spent $40 on gas and tolls to get to my fishing spot, and more than $30 on dinner for two on the way home.

Right now, if you fish 30 times a year, your fishing license cost works out to be a dollar a trip. And a 3% increase in license fees each year would work out to be less than nickel per trip.

As they say on ESPN..................C'mon Man!!
Click to expand...

That isn't justification for raising fees. That's a sales pitch to get acceptance. I think it will lead to a drop in license sales. Just like every thing else there will be fewer people carrying the load. And doubling the senior license isn't right.


For what it's worth I've seen a number of wardens over the past two years. Often on Nockamixon and Howard. Once on a Susquehanna boat launch, once on Yellow Breaches. Once on Spring.
 

I haven't seen a fish warden on the water in over 25 years
 
I've never seen a fish warden, just waterways conservation officers.
 
$31 for one day. yikes !

 
I didn't read the proposal, but what is the proposed senior license and for how many years?
 
Laz,

Per proposal, Senior lifetime goes from current $50.00/year to $100.00/year in 2017 and increases to $115.93 in 2022.

Senior annual does not have that dramatic a rise from current $10.00/year to $12.50 in 2017 and $20.00 in 2022.

Didn't see any multi year proposals/increases for trout/Lake Erie stamps. Don't know if these programs are discontinued.
 
I don't care for the assumed 3% inflation, but would support an increase (or decrease) tied to the CPI. I've long said when the license increases resemble a step function, people bail on buying licenses and the PFBC data supports this. Increase the price linearly each year and you won't lose as many license purchases.

The proposed price of a resident license plus trout/salmon/Erie permit by 2022 is the price of one case of really good craft beer, or two mid-range cases or a few 30-packs of cans. Most people spend far more money on their vices, maybe on one outing, than their license of $52.67 for the whole year..

There are a finite number of WCOs to go around, and without massive license increases to support more personnel, you won't see many more being hired. That being said, just because you don't see a WCO doesn't mean he/she hasn't seen you. And if you see violations of the law, help the WCOs out by letting them know where to focus their efforts. With 86,000 (+/-) miles of streams and waterways, it's tough for them to be everywhere at once.
 
Swattie87 wrote:
However you slice it, for those that actually fish year round, it's still a heck of a bargain when compared to other entertainment/sporting options...for example, it's about the same cost as one round of golf at a mid range course.
Click to expand...
Couldn't agree more.
 
So if someone only fishes for Gemmies their license should have no fee ? Just asking
 
A quick look at the bill, I took away the following;

* Their stats show significant decreases in license sales when the prices are raised. Seems to me that higher fees + lower participation = ??.....less revenue or maybe the same revenue if they are lucky.

* No mention of wild trout.

* Transparency. Elected / appointed officials have promised this for years. Not sure any have backed up that promise.

* No breakdown of how these increased funds will be spent. I have a feeling 0.90¢ out of every new dollar raised will go to collapsing pension system.

I'd have to guess that I will probably pass on a trout stamp for the first time in 32 years. The direction of the PFBC, lack of expanding wild trout opportunities, fee increase, etc., etc. I'll still have to buy a license to smallmouth fish but once the Susky crashes again, they'll get $0 from me. I'll give it to other states in the form of non-resident licenses.
 
I was on lower Elk Creek last week and I saw a CO come walking out of the woods and while he passed at least ten anglers he never asked even one fisher to show his fishing license. He walked past me and when he could no longer walk on the dry creek bed he turned around and went back into the woods and I assume back to his vehicle.
 
I buy a non res and trout stamp every year. Excluding border waters I probably fish pa 10-20 days a year. I don't display my license and I've been checked a lot, big spring, spring, valley by a park ranger, Ridley creek, white clay creek, little Lehigh, at the junction pool on the de twice. They always asked to see my license and most told me if I had displayed it they wouldn't have bothered me. Since 2011, I only fish pa in the winter when I cannot fish in NY. I have fished in pa since 2007. I've probably been checked in NY 3 times in that time period.

I hate that I have to buy a trout stamp, same with the Erie sta,p. Just roll the price into the regular license. I don't fish for anything other than trout in pa. To me it's just a money grab.
 
krayfish2 wrote:
A quick look at the bill, I took away the following;

* Their stats show significant decreases in license sales when the prices are raised. Seems to me that higher fees + lower participation = ??.....less revenue or maybe the same revenue if they are lucky.

* No mention of wild trout.

* Transparency. Elected / appointed officials have promised this for years. Not sure any have backed up that promise.

* No breakdown of how these increased funds will be spent. I have a feeling 0.90¢ out of every new dollar raised will go to collapsing pension system.

I'd have to guess that I will probably pass on a trout stamp for the first time in 32 years. The direction of the PFBC, lack of expanding wild trout opportunities, fee increase, etc., etc. I'll still have to buy a license to smallmouth fish but once the Susky crashes again, they'll get $0 from me. I'll give it to other states in the form of non-resident licenses.
Click to expand...

In some of their arguments they mention changing demographics. It's obvious the average age of those fishing is increasing, ie. not recruiting the youngsters. Thus they are proposing increasing the senior license but 100%.

There are also hints that much of this is going to go towards increased stocking.

Whenever a service I purchase goes up drastically in price I tend to take notice and re-evaluate my spending. Thus I'll cut out the Erie stamp I bought many years even though I wasn't fishing there. Also those boat licenses on the canoes and kayaks that in many years only go on the county park lakes.
 
CRB wrote:
I am not infavor of the diversion of Lake Erie money. I believe the PAFBC needs to set it up with property owners to gather more stream mile easements on the PA Tributaries. I know as a fact the properties that are closed could be opened if the PAFBC would step up the $$.
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree.
Originally the stamp was used to buy out and replace gill nets for the commercial fishery.
Then it was used to buy easements and improve access for the steelhead fishery. I'm not sure why the perch, walleye, sm,crappie anglers were also targeted and required to contribute funds for the steelhead fishery.
Now, they have already broadened the use of this stamp fund in 2009.
So CRB, what exactly do they want to use these funds for, now?
 


PA Long Bow They don't enforce anything right now hardly anyhow. Just make the license a different color
 
franklin wrote:
Thus I'll cut out the Erie stamp I bought many years even though I wasn't fishing there. Also those boat licenses on the canoes and kayaks that in many years only go on the county park lakes.
Click to expand...
I know at least a few people that buy a fishing license with trout and Erie stamp every year that haven't fished in years. With increases every year they will be more likely to not continue to purchase them. If I know a few, I'm some many others do as well. I'd assume this will also drive away some of the opening day only people.

After a few years I could see the PFBC driving away all but the most dedicated fisherman when the lost revenue from the casuals who move on is passed on to the dedicated ones. Which will probably drive them away too.
 
Glad I bought my 3 year license with stamps
 
I don't see this going anywhere. It is an election year. The Game Commission asked for a license increase and it didn't get any traction. I doubt the legislature will grant a license increase.

Between the November election and license sales for 2017 starting on December 1st I just don't see the increase happening for next year.

I am not going to argue for or against. But I will say that if there is no increase for next year my wife and I will be buying 5 year licenses with trout stamps.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Montana Angler Fly Fishing
Montana Angler Fly Fishing
Harman's North Fork Cottages


Real Time Data From
the USGS Site

Share this page

Back
Top