Supporting our sport

[afishinado]

Reading some posts and threads on here inspired me to write an editorial on our sport, or more precisely supporting our sport.

There are those that aim to spend the least amount of money to participate in our sport. I’m not talking about tackle, I’m referring to those that try to avoid, or constantly complain about paying for fishing licenses, launch or boat permits and other user fees that support fishing.

Others look to spend a lot of their dollars supporting private concerns that buy up or lock up areas to exclude open fishing. If carried too far, I believe our sport will be diminished.

IMHO, as with most things in life, the answer lies somewhere in between.

Every angler should expect to pay a reasonable amount for the privilege of fishing, and buying a license or permit is the very minimum one can do to support our sport. I encourage everyone on here to support a modest increase in license fees to keep the PA Fish & Boat Commission solvent, as well as independent from the politicians. We all can see how well they handle our finances and affairs in our State!

If you are an ardent sportsman or even a beginner to the sport, I recommend you spend some of your time to volunteer and/or contribute some of your dollars by joining a conservation, fishing, or sportsmen club. Supporting such an organization is a great way to further your own interests as well as enhance the sport. Many of these clubs and organizations do some great things that benefit us all.

In addition, pass on your knowledge and help others to learn about fly-fishing and grow in the sport we all love. There are many on here that do just that. We all should appreciate all of them, and try to take what they give us and pay it forward.

In short, do something, even the smallest thing by giving a little of your time and/or a few dollars to enhance fishing and promote the conservation or enhancement of our streams, rivers and lakes. We should do this for the good of the sport right now, and for the good of all those that follow us in future generations.

 

[JackM]

Good points and if you put your money and time into endeavors that favor wild trout and habitat, for instance, you can expect your influence to be in that area.

 

[PocketWater]

afishinado wrote:
In addition, pass on your knowledge and help others to learn about fly-fishing and grow in the sport we all love.

Except hipsters. Don't tell them a damn thing. :lol:

Good thoughts afishinado. The way I see it is a fishing license is currently cheap as hell when you compare it to the cost of tickets to see most 'entertainment' type events. Don't want to necessarily compare fly fishing with concerts, movies, sporting events, etc., but in essence that is the closest thing I can think of to compare it to. Most of those events last at most 3 hours. A fishing license gives you a free pass to 365 days of entertainment, should you choose to take advantage.

I think most the people that would complain about a rise in license cost would be those that get a license to go out on opening day of trout and that is it.

 

[lestrout]

Amen to Tom and Pocket's thoughts.

 

[McSneek]

afishinado wrote:
I encourage everyone on here to support a modest increase in license fees to keep the PA Fish & Boat Commission solvent, as well as independent from the politicians.

Think it's too late for that.

 

[salmonoid]

A modest license fee increase does not fix anything long-term. It only punts a financial crisis down the road a few years. It throws out a life preserver, but a life preserver won't keep you afloat in high seas forever. You allude to, at times, those on this board (and I suppose elsewhere) that want to starve the PFBC to death. I suppose those folks do exist, those that would rather have no PFBC at all (despite the good that it does) than have a PFBC that stocks a single fish, while a single wild fish is still alive in the Commonwealth, but I think they are a vocal minority. I'd support a dollar for dollar increase of license fees that was offset by a dollar for dollar decrease in PFBC expenditures. Go through and cut the fat. PFBC does not need to be stocking 300 fish in a remote mountain stream that a stocking truck can barely get to and that has a viable natural population of fish (or could have a more vibrant population if the natural reproduction was not suppressed by stocked fish). And there are many streams that have sections that could be stocked, but simply drop a section from the stocking list (just fished one such stream Saturday afternoon; there's still one stream section that is ten or more miles that would benefit from stocking, but drop the section that currently holds wild trout, below the Class A section). Go through with the plan to shut a few of the hatcheries. Advocate for pension reform. Allocate the limited stocked fish for marginal waters. It is not the principal of a license increase that bothers me; it is the principal that the only way to solve a financial crisis is to increase taxes, while ignoring cost cutting or a mix of increase in taxes (license fees) and cost cutting.

I don't think there will ever be consensus on the PFBC - how it is funded, what it's mission is or should be, how many fish should be stocked, etc. And as most observers would conclude, the PFBC is far from independent from the politicians. The PFBC is independent when it comes to having politicians help to raise funds (the PFBC usually hear crickets when the hand for money goes out; politicians are hands off at that point) but politicians pop out of the woodwork anytime the PFBC goes knocking in an area they or their constituents or donors don't like (i.e. closing hatcheries). This funding topic is grist mill fodder for winter cabin fever, and it ain't winter yet

When comparing the cost of a license to other forms of entertainment or activities, the total cost to outfit an angler should ultimately be considered. When you go to a concert or a movie, you buy tickets, but you probably aren't buying special clothes or boots or optics. Fishing rods, reels, lines, flies, wading boots, waders, polarized glasses are all not free, and even if you buy el cheapo versions of all of those, you're still looking at an upfront investment of several hundred dollars, minimum. And since waders leak and rods break and reels get sand in them, lines rip, flies get snagged on trees or underwater obstructions, you'll have to continue to replace stuff. I think a more accurate statement is that the annual privilege of fishing is a bargain, but the total cost of fishing in a year is not just the license fee and isn't exactly zero.

Most important, though, is the call for everyone to be involved. Clean up trash, help with stream improvements, take a kid or a parent or grandparent or a neighbor fishing, donate money to conservation organizations, put the online energy that is spent squabbling into real world work on streams and lakes. Report poachers, collect stream data, converse with fisheries biologists, help carry a bucket to stock marginal waters. If everyone gave a hundredth as much as they take out of the sport, fishing in PA would get a real boost. Can you imagine a legion of over a million anglers (and their families) giving, instead of just consuming? Some percentage already give back, but imagine if everyone did. Doing something, even if it may not seem like much, is better than doing nothing at all. This principle of giving and not just consuming is fundamental to life, not just those folks involved with angling.

 

[RCFetter]

I think the cost of a senior's (that's me) license is very inexpensive. Same with the cost of TU membership.

 

[boychick]

Afish said it well.