What WOULD You Be Willing to Pay For a Year Long PA Fishing License?

[Swattie87]

Spinoff from PFBC License Hike Thread

Or conversely, how much would it need to be to get you to not buy it and give up fishing for a year? Thought about doing this as a poll, but I thought it'd be better to allow for more individualized responses. Reason I ask is that I still think a fishing license is a darn good bargain, and a relatively cheap form of entertainment for those who use it year round. In comparison to other pastimes or even hunting for example, where the license is only for a fairly restrictive, specific time frame.

For me, it’s probably somewhere around $1,000. In all seriousness. It’s my main form of relaxation/recreation and how I prefer to spend my vacation time. It’s less than a decent single round of golf, and if I wasn’t fishing on a regular basis, I’d probably spend a lot more on golf each year. At $1k, I’d have to monitor other spending throughout the year, and anything much more than that I simply couldn’t afford it, but $50, $100, heck $200/year…they all seem like bargains to me for the amount of enjoyment I get from it.

The PFBC needs to balance the demand curve for their product (a fishing license), and make sure from the micro side they can operate efficiently from a cost perspective within those demand parameters. Any increase in price will result in less sales, unless there is additional services being offered as part of that price increase, which there isn’t in this case. At some point total revenue may actually be less due to lost sales. It’s a fine balance, and admittedly for them, probably not an easy one to predict. As mentioned in the other thread, I think yearly, smaller, but steady increases will be met with less loss of sales, and produce a more long term sustainable solution. Hiking it to even $50 immediately will likely have a significant sticker shot, even if us hard core guys wouldn’t care much.

 

[duckfoot]

You assume the best in people, and that's not a bad character trait.

Upping the prices on regulation pushes more people to cheat the system and poach. Happens in many things, not just fishing.

 

[Wallyfish]

I would pay much more as well. Fishing is my serenity zone. Nothing on earth soothes my soul as much as fishing.

I have a very pricey bass boat, an even more pricier Kropf Park Model Little home on Chautauqua Lake, and I drive over 9,000 miles a year pursuing fish. I buy out of state licenses all more than what the cost of the Pa license is.

I retired in 2016, but before retirement I would go frequently on golf outings to some of the better golf courses in western Pa. I would see some courses charging around $150 for a round in the summer.

Compared to a round of golf, the proposed Pa license rates are cheap. I would gladly pay more and I am one cheap a**.

 

[steveo27]

Im not even sure what I paid for my last license at this point. Im on year 3 of my 3 year license. I think with the Erie combo the license is right around 40$ a year IIRC.

Like others have said, fishing is what keeps me sane. It keeps me from offing my co-workers and other people I see on a daily basis LOL.

Im not even sure, I never really put a price on it, but I feel like Id probably be willing to pay a pretty good bit to keep fishing and keep my sanity.

Reasonably, if the license went up to 50$ + another 25$ for a trout stamp tomorrow, I wouldnt hesitate to pay that. Id ditch the Erie stamp though to make up some of the cost. I always buy it "just in case". I havent fished in Erie in 15+ years now.

I play ice hockey as well, now thats an expensive sport to play. I play at least 1 pick up game a week and 1 league game a week. Pickup games are typically cost 10$ a person, so thats over 500$ a year. Each league game costs about 15$ a game so thats about 750$ a year. Thats over 1250$ a year to play hockey about 100 times a year, or 12.50$ per day played.

I probably fish between 75-100 days a year, and would gladly pay 12.50$ each time I fished. So I guess 1000$ for a fishing license with a trout stamp isnt horrible if you look at it that way.

 

[salmonoid]

I think you'll get skewed responses. Most anglers that can afford fly-fishing equipment and all the accessories have disposable income and can afford to pay a higher license rate and would also be willing to pay a higher license rate for them to enjoy their hobby. I don't think I'd balk at anything up to $200. Above that and I'd be tempted to keep my fishing to the night-time and the backwoods (which is about 75% of my fishing as it stands), and would only pay $37.50

 

[JackM]

I would pay $25 per quarter, probably selecting April through June first.Then maybe, maybe not do the 3rd and/or 4th quarters.

 

[724flyfishing]

As the way things are right now with how things are managed, $50 + stamp costs would be about my limit before I became very disgruntled and constantly b!t&@ed and complained to the point no one would want to fish with me ha ha ha. In all seriousness I'd probably go higher.

Now if they'd start a second season from lets say the first Saturday in October to the end of the year, and offered a fall stamp, or doubled/tripled the trout stamp, I would fully support that. I mean a second season as in stocking the ATW creeks again, twice. I'd be happy if it was 50% of the creeks stocked twice in the fall.

 

[JackM]

If they also sold the permits by quarter, I'd probably save money.

 

[blkpowder]

Wallyfish, I would pay much more as well. Fishing is my serenity zone. Nothing on earth soothes my soul as much as fishing.

steveo27, Like others have said, fishing is what keeps me sane. It keeps me from offing my co-workers and other people I see on a daily basis LOL.



I’m a hundred percent agreement on both reply’s! Lol


salmonoid,I think you'll get skewed responses. Most anglers that can afford fly-fishing equipment and all the accessories have disposable income and can afford to pay a higher license rate and would also be willing to pay a higher license rate for them to enjoy their hobby. I don't think I'd balk at anything up to $200. Above that and I'd be tempted to keep my fishing to the night-time and the backwoods (which is about 75% of my fishing as it stands), and would only pay $37.50


Totally disagree! I have been fly fishing for forty years. I sure the hell don’t have a disposable income. I make 32,000 a year. And I would pay more for a license. But for me and I’m just speaking for me. I would like to see the PFBC change some of their ways for that money. More catch and release waters. Class A streams. I would like to see the PFBC to change their ways on how they promote the sport. Take for example these new Keystone select Trout waters and even their Fishing Summary that came with your license. All this hype about big fish. Front page of the Summary,man woman and child,all holding big fish of some species. Buy a trout stamp and we will now guarantee you will catch big trout. ( Keystone select waters ) Front cover of the Summary, ( buy a fishing license and you will catch big fish like these anglers.That is wrong! Fishing is to be me time or family time. Time to relax and enjoy. If you catch fish or even a big fish,Great! The PFBC needs to change it’s belief that it is greed and consumption that generate fishing license sales!

 

[JackM]

This said, I comment as follows:

The suggestion of quarterly resident licenses will probably also lower sales, but I bet not as much. But most importantly would point the Commission in the direction of analyzing the "fishing demographics" of the user base. This could be helpful in dedicating resources to those who pay for them. Those of us who may fish 100 days per year should pay a lot more than the weekend warrior that may fish 5-7 days, and then barely fish so much as they drink by the campfire.

 

[salmonoid]

blkpowder wrote:
Wallyfish, I would pay much more as well. Fishing is my serenity zone. Nothing on earth soothes my soul as much as fishing.

steveo27, Like others have said, fishing is what keeps me sane. It keeps me from offing my co-workers and other people I see on a daily basis LOL.



I’m a hundred percent agreement on both reply’s! Lol


salmonoid,I think you'll get skewed responses. Most anglers that can afford fly-fishing equipment and all the accessories have disposable income and can afford to pay a higher license rate and would also be willing to pay a higher license rate for them to enjoy their hobby. I don't think I'd balk at anything up to $200. Above that and I'd be tempted to keep my fishing to the night-time and the backwoods (which is about 75% of my fishing as it stands), and would only pay $37.50


Totally disagree! I have been fly fishing for forty years. I sure the hell don’t have a disposable income. I make 32,000 a year. And I would pay more for a license. But for me and I’m just speaking for me. I would like to see the PFBC change some of their ways for that money. More catch and release waters. Class A streams. I would like to see the PFBC to change their ways on how they promote the sport. Take for example these new Keystone select Trout waters and even their Fishing Summary that came with your license. All this hype about big fish. Front page of the Summary,man woman and child,all holding big fish of some species. Buy a trout stamp and we will now guarantee you will catch big trout. ( Keystone select waters ) Front cover of the Summary, ( buy a fishing license and you will catch big fish like these anglers.That is wrong! Fishing is to be me time or family time. Time to relax and enjoy. If you catch fish or even a big fish,Great! The PFBC needs to change it’s belief that it is greed and consumption that generate fishing license sales!

Read my post. I said most anglers. Not all fly-fishing anglers. My point was that what PAFF forum anglers are willing to pay is probably not inline with what Joe-Bob Zebco pushbutton reel fisherguy is willing to pay. So it's an interesting question that Swattie poses, but don't expect the responses to be representative of the general PA fishing populace. And that group far outnumbers the number of fly-fishing license buyers.

 

[Troy]

I would pay $1,000. I wouldn't be happy at all, but it is my hobby and I don't think I could do without it.

 

[The_Sasquatch]

I couldn't pay $1000. Honestly, $100 all in one shot would be tough for me. I'm still workin' on that masters degree, have 3 kids, and while it sounds luxurious, a pastoral internship really doesn't give me THAT much disposable income. Anything above $50 would be hard to justify to my wife. But I'd find a way, of course

 

[TJones]

I'm a junky... they could pretty much charge whatever they want I'd pay it lol

Aggree with the previous poster about not being happy about it, but not much I could do

 

[ryansheehan]

Consider me an addict and fishing my heroine. What could they charge? I would find a way, not sure I should admit that.......

 

[PennKev]

At a $1000, and assuming other states did not raise their prices accordingly, I would simply take a couple more big trips a year and skip fishing in PA. $1000 will buy me air fare to just about anywhere in the lower 48 and cover rental car cost for a week.

Fishing in PA is good... ...but not that good.

On the other hand, if all states charged that amount for licenses, I would pay the money and enjoy the suddenly uncrowded streams.

 

[bigslackwater]

I feel like this thread could be used as sample data in favor of a license hike by the PFBC. Lets not go overboard with how much we'd be willing to spend!!!

In all seriousness, it would be tough for me to decide how much. Living in south central PA I usually buy a MD, PA, WV and Sometimes a VA license. In the past few years I've had a MN, TN and AK license as well (granted some of these were 1 week licenses, but they all add up). Since some states use reciprocal rates, the rise in PA rates will also mean a rise in other states. So, I think if the cost went up I'd have to start deciding which states I'd want to NOT fish each year, and possibly alternate years between MD and PA. I've got a little kids, a business to run, and lots of bills to pay so if something has to get cut, as much as I'd hate to do it, a fishing license might top the list of non necessities.

 

[tomitrout]

I'd probably be ok with spending up to the $100 range for an annual resident license, more than that and I'd be reluctant to buy one, depends what I'm getting for my money at that point. Doesn't necessarily mean I'd give up fishing at that point though..

 

[Dave_W]

Like most of you, I'd pay a lot more for a license to fish simply because, like you, fishing is something I love and do a lot.

Of course, the bottom line (literally from the PFBC's point of view) is the matter of how many license buyers would be lost due to the great increase. Countless casual anglers would drop out of the sport and this effect would get compounded over the years due to their children never getting introduced to the sport. . .and revuenues would likely fall at a greater rate than would be covered by the big increase paid by us enthusiasts.

As I see it, the key from the PFBC's point of view is sustainability and this really requires the widest base of users and this means keeping rates low enough to keep casual anglers in the sport. Furthermore, I agree with the PFBC philosophy that trout stocking is essential to this retention of the casual angler base.

It's not about us FFers and hard core types. Marginal anglers really matter a lot.

 

[DanL]

I think paying around $50 per year for a combined license/trout/erie would be fair, but I would pay up to $250 a year if I had to since it's one of my main hobbies.