Proposed fishing license fee increase

Troy wrote:
I don't have a problem with paying a little more for my license. I get my monies worth and more. I do have a problem with a license fee increase if it is strictly to help increase trout stocking. I fish for stocked trout about 5% of the time I am trout fishing. I also haven't kept a fish in about 25 years.

Why can't the people who keep fish pay more than the people who never keep fish? I don't think I should have to pay the same as a fisherman who harvests 100 trout per year. Maybe they could charge harvesting fishermen more than catch and release fishermen. It would be simple to do.

I know some people will say that it will be too hard to enforce. It is no different than when people fish without a license. There is always a chance to get caught even though it is tough to monitor. If you want to take the chance, that is on you.
Click to expand...

I agree on your premise. Though it would be very difficult to enforce without set boundaries and more WCO's.

I don't mind a license increase. I do mind funding a program that's detrimental to our native, and wild, trout. The same program that's a major drain on the agency.
 
Troutbert,

Please be careful in making sweeping accusations about senior lifetime license holders (SLL).

I know at least 15 anglers who have SLL. Over half including me never keep fish. One harvests a few and the rest really don't fish.

Yes, I've seen seniors harvesting fish but I nor you have any statistics on whether they harvest their unfair share of fish.

If anyone has such statistics (not your observations), I would like to see them.

Lastly, I nor most all of the SLL holders I no wouldn't have an issue if these licenses would have any problems if the fish commission would make them null and void and require us to purchase a yearly type with a trout stamp. Also, have no issue if the commission would add an additional fee for SLL holders in the future.

I've purchase a PA fishing license since 1965 as well as the stamp when it became effective. 26 of those years, I purchased a non-resident PA fishing license and stamp. I've paid into the system more than most if not all anglers who were PA residents for the last 40 years. Over that time period, I harvested very few fish.

I'm just very happy to have the wild trout waters available to us.

Dale

 
Dale49 wrote:
Troutbert,

Please be careful in making sweeping accusations about senior lifetime license holders (SLL).

I know at least 15 anglers who have SLL. Over half including me never keep fish. One harvests a few and the rest really don't fish.

Yes, I've seen seniors harvesting fish but I nor you have any statistics on whether they harvest their unfair share of fish.

If anyone has such statistics (not your observations), I would like to see them.

Lastly, I nor most all of the SLL holders I no wouldn't have an issue if these licenses would have any problems if the fish commission would make them null and void and require us to purchase a yearly type with a trout stamp. Also, have no issue if the commission would add an additional fee for SLL holders in the future.

I've purchase a PA fishing license since 1965 as well as the stamp when it became effective. 26 of those years, I purchased a non-resident PA fishing license and stamp. I've paid into the system more than most if not all anglers who were PA residents for the last 40 years. Over that time period, I harvested very few fish.

I'm just very happy to have the wild trout waters available to us.

Dale
Click to expand...

What I said was this, and ONLY this:

----------------------------------------------------
A large number of the people who are keeping a lot of fish are those with senior licenses.

If anyone doubts this, go to streams when inseason stocking is being done, and see who is there catching and keeping fish.

The senior license was a budget buster. Does anyone remember when the senior license began?
----------------------------------------------------

You are arguing against things that I haven't said.
 
I've brought up the idea of c&r vs harvest licenses a number of times, and believe with some thoughtful insight, that it could be viable.

While not all atw streams/sections are viable wild trout fisheries, many are excellent streams that do/could provide year round fishing. There has been a lot of research which supports the hypothesis that stocking over wild populations is detrimental to the wild population. Furthermore, even if not harvested, few of those stocked fish actually survive due to not coping with environmental conditions etc.

The PFBC's business model is not remotely sustainable. They really need to focus on their proposed goal of providing fishing opportunities (not filling freezers at a loss), and doing so year round.
 
troutbert wrote:
Does anyone remember when the senior license began?
Click to expand...

Not sure when it began, but it has been in effect since at least the mid 1960s.

Agree that some modest reforms of the senior license are long overdue.
 
How about this-- Senior Lifetime-- No Harvest; Senior Lifetime, regulation harvest permitted. $0 no harvest, $10 with full harvest privileges. Anyone on board with me?
 
^ Annually?

One time- no. That's about as slick Capt Bighamton on McHails Navy.
 
Good point. I should have said: $10 for any year the senior licensee wishes to harvest. If they want to be C&R for that year, they simply renew for free.
 
I have to laugh, WGMiller posted a comment about this on the a news facebook page, and the comments from the "majority" of "fishermen" were, well, shall we say not so much for the increase. Pretty much saying they will just fish without a license before spending a dollar more. Obviously they care so much for the resource, and for the environment.
pretty much sums up what I figured, the average fisherman in this state can give a #censor# about catch and release, about the resource, and about the future.
it's all about what can I catch and kill right now! screw everyone else. oh man, the comments alone could fill a book! but the best one I read was, "you promised me larger trout"
we're screwed if these comments represent even a small majority, clueless dolts, and that's the nicest thing I can call them.
bottom line, as catch and release flyfishers that are trying to gather protection for wild trout and all the good things that come with that?
we're pissing up a rope. because the common idiot out there not only has trouble identifying the fish, he can't even SPELL the word FISH!!!!!
I'm done being tolerant to masterbaiters. bunch of F#@king ignorant F#@king hacks. may they get treble hooks buried in their fingers.

 
That's a valid observation, biker. Though I don't deal with the bookface.

Like I said in a previous thread "people with that mindset are the reason we can't have nice things".
 
Frankly I'm getting a little sick and tired of modest increases in my everyday life when my salary has become stagnant over the last several years. You all may have the means to absorb these costs but every time I turn around they want more for healthcare contributions, turnpike fees, utilities, food, auto registration, insurance, college costs, etc., etc. and I can't afford any of it. So, no, I'm not in favor of this. At this rate I'll keep my NY non-resident and fish anywhere I please @$50/yr in NY, and give up my resident PA which nickle and dimes me for every different kind of fishing or water I fish. Again, no thanks.
 
bikerfish wrote:
I have to laugh, WGMiller posted a comment about this on the a news facebook page, and the comments from the "majority" of "fishermen" were, well, shall we say not so much for the increase.
Click to expand...

You saw that Biker??? :-D

I realized that I was quickly losing a battle of wits with unarmed "men". A lot of people talk tough on FB and chances are most of them will still purchase a license if an increase goes through. I tried to get the point across that even at $26 it would still be a bargain. I also tried to drill into their heads that the PFBC doesn't receive tax dollars, so they have to generate their own funds. There is no doubt in my mind that a majority of the users who visit this site are the minority in PA when it comes to their stance on angling issues...
 
Out of stater but first 29 years a Pa resident. Pay extra for out of state license. Obviously. Didn't keep any fish last year. Maybe maximum of 2 per year for last 10 years as out of state paying extra. If they raise the cost I will keep my catch up to the limit going forward . Will bring them home to eat or share with others. They taste good.
Wild trout seem to taste better than stockies though.
 
I rather see a raise instead of them losing 700k on a dollar decrease...
 
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