Would you support a license for clamming?

[Jennie@ifish]

Clamming License

[WheresMyBobber]

Jennie, I'm curious as to the origin of this question - is the possibility of a clamming license being discussed by the ODFW?

And for the people who have responded so far in support of such a license, what are your reasons?

Has a need for clamming license fees been identified? Or is the thinking just that it would put more $$ into ODFW coffers?

Is it because fishermen and hunters need licenses, you think clammers should need licenses too?

How can you say how much you'll pay for a clamming license if you haven't seen a comprehensive shellfish management plan that would require XX amount of $$?

If the license were part of the Angling license, would you prefer it be an optional Tag, or would every angler have to pay for it as part of their license fees even if they never went clamming? What about the people who don't fish but like to go clamming?

Im curious, because I find the poll results so far interesting given that these are just hypothetical questions. In order to make informed responses, it seems that a demonstrated need and a proposed plan would need to be put together and reviewed.

Just trying to stimulate discussion, that's all. :smile:

[Get Bent]

I would definitely support a separate license for clamming as a revenue source for the ODFW, although I am not convinced that all revenues from a license sale should go to only the management of the shellfish. Keep it in the ODFW, though. It certainly costs money to manage the shellfish, and if a shellfish license paid for (at least) the management then those funds that originally came from the ODFW budget could be applied to other fisheries-related items.

Keep the shellfish license separate from the fishing license. Besides, shellfish gathering is more hunting than fishing anyway. :wink:

[chummer]

While i'm not a big fan of more and different tags, i believe a shellfish tag is long overdue, as long as it pays for limit enforcement, it is way to easy to take extra clams as many do, which was just recently pointed out by the people who had hundreds of clams. I also believe oregon should develop specific clam seasons as washington does for razors. I read the stories earlier this year pertaining to our great razor clamming and how locals were going down every day, week after week, collecting 15 clams, bragging how the freezer was full. Honestly, do we need that many clams in our freezer.

[steelheadslayer]

Jennie, as being from Wash. we have a shellfish license which includes oysters, seaweed and clams of all types. It's relatively inexpensive by itself or we can get a combination license for any and all types of fishing which makes it a real bargain. You may get a lot of negative responses from only clam diggers who haven't needed a license in the past, and I say, "why should all of the true outdoorspeople pay for all the rest of the public to enjoy them at our expense." Just my thoughts. :wink:

[Jennie@ifish]

Originally posted by WheresMyBobber:
Jennie, I'm curious as to the origin of this question - is the possibility of a clamming license being discussed by the ODFW?

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">Hi there! I have been asked by Posh to pose this question to you. I spent some time trying to figure out how to ask it, and finally asked for Pete's help.

I don't know the answers to most of your questions.
All I know is that there is much waste occuring, and something needs to be done. We need more policing of the beaches as clamming laws are being broken and not prosecuted.

I agree that a plan needs to be put together and reviewed in order to get a more clear picture.

Jen

Jen

[bigshark]

Wheres My Bobber

The reason I support a licence is that the proceeds would go to the shellfish department
for their needs and not others. The enforcement problem is totally out of hand. One cop for razor digging on the north coast is a joke. I made it down every week there was a clamming tide this spring and summer and the waste was the most sickening thing I have seen in years. If you read the paper lately you may have seen the article on the clammers with 700 over the limit. This case was at T-Bay and didn't envolve razor clams but the Blue s and others are just as important. I did see one case at Sunset beach that did envolve taking more than 200 illegal razors. The number of cars from out of state was much higher than I expected to see. Our Wassie friends were there and I am happy to see them, but they need to pay just as I do when I'm on their beaches. The California and Idaho plates were not infreguent, I had to wonder if they were just visiting friends or had made a trip to do the clamming.
I have waited almost 30 years for the razor clams to come back and I am willing to pay to see that they aren't depleated by man.
What nature can do to them is another thing and we can't do much about that unless there is some research done that can give us an answer. I do not believe that any Ifishers want
something for nothing and if given enough information will support such a fee.

[poshie]

:smile: I apologize for this lengthy post and repetition.
The whole question of a clamming licence to my knowledge was brought up as a source of revenue to keep the hatcheries from closing. And we supported this. However, we were uninformed as to the great number of clammers (1000's), the lack of enforcement ability, and the numbers of people who have no idea about the regulations.
:smile: Jen's quote from Aug 14th on a thread on clamming.
OK... I see very clearly that we need the laws on clamming changed now.
How do we go about this?
Jen <font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">I don't have any great plan. But an enlightenment period is in order and emails to Zane or others have to be worth something for enhancing enforcement and attempting to educate people about KEEPING every clam, and wanton waste, etc. I asked for a poll because of the number of people who read this board might like to express their opinion and not preach to the choir.
My statements are not figments of my imagination. These are personal observations that can be seen time and time again.

There is also a problem with one individual digging for many children (3-5)who have buckets and can no way dig...after all, your daily limit in Alaska is 45..was 60..so one person digging for many kids is easy. Walking off the beach with 40 to 60 clams is easy. I am not referring to any person who digs for a person who is limited in a physical way...and I believe there are rules for that already.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
:smile: WheresMy Bobber: There has been a lot of discussion on this board so if you go to Search you will find several threads on clamming issues and the last I believe was on August 14th. However, a few were not the most flattering opinions and I would not like to see references to ethnic origins repeated to Zane Smith.
I have posted below the past references to clam issues that I remember. Someone else might be able to add to the history.

Hence the email address thread for Zane and I might add or email anyone else that you care to express your opinion. If you don't get a chance to come to an actual ODFW meeting, at least you can be heard.

1. The clamming licence issue was brought up at the biggie Tillamook hatchery meeting and maybe before..
2. The clamming issues were brought up at the June 7th? meeting of the ODFW. A report was submitted to the commission by Matthew Hunter, a young biologist, although it stated some good information, it did not provide solutions or when changes could be made if needed. Nor was the waste and poaching by overzealous people addressed. He is not my choice to voice your concerns.
3. Closing the season early was requested by a group and denied. So if you enjoyed the last two really prominent low tides in June and July, it could just as easily have been closed.

There are a lot of out of staters clamming and just as I paid $42 last year to Washington
we could also benefit from that income. I paid $21 gladly to clam in Washington. What I didn't like was the fact that I went without my licence and they couldn't find my purchase in their computer, so I paid again...
Most are all aware of Washington's plan which personally I feel is too limited on clamming days. It shoves everyone on the beach at the same time. This past year they had one day open, the next day closed, the following day open. For us that is an extra night lodging which we don't care to spend money on.
There is a group called Friends of the Razors.
I believe they are a local group out of the North Beach area, which may be some of these board members..if anyone cares to post their mission (WITH JENNIE'S PERMISSION)
I'd like to hear it or read it.
So at least for the past four or five months, everybody has talked here and there. We have another season starting October 1st which surely will result in another year of the
past.
Be that as it may, I hope that we all have input
into what we would like to see happen and hopefully, we are all close to the same track. :smile:

[ 08-19-2002, 02:02 PM: Message edited by: posh II ]

[Silverado]

I think it should also include crabbing. I also don't think a major management plan would be needed, because with a license 90+% of the people would obey the rules, and the others... well they will always be the "others"

[poshie]

:smile: WheresMy Bobber and Silverado... and I hope that you email them to

zanegreysmith@msn.com or another commissioner of your choice. :smile:

I meant to say earlier that it should be a shellfish in total. There are alot of people who do not fish and want clams or crabs only. :smile:

[ 08-19-2002, 01:50 PM: Message edited by: posh II ]

[Jennie@ifish]

An e mail I recieved:

As far as the clamming issues, the ODFW commission is unlikely to change any of the current regulations at this time. As for a fee, the commission has no authority to enact a new license, that must come from the state legislature. There is a grassroots organization that is attempting to lobby local legislatures to propose some form of bill for such a fee. They are called Friends of the Razor Clam and have had two meetings so far. I will let you know when they have another.

[garyk]

Generally, I think an angling license should be required for crabs/clams. My preference would be that if you purchase a general angling license, shellfish harvest would be included.

Those infrequent users (once a year beach goers etc.) would need to buy a crab/clam ‘CC" tag for, let's propose, $5 for two consecutive days (that takes care of the typical weekend visit).

Regarding the need. If Oregonians are not willing to fund ODFW out of the state's general fund, as the trend has been, the load has to be carried by the resource users; and there are then three choices to funding ODFW commensurate with the level of services desired:

1. Cutback services -- which hasn't been popular on this board.

2. Increase existing license fees, (with a Legislature that won't raise taxes to fund essential services, good luck).

3. Create additional revenue sources. The CC tag would do this and, hopefully, allow for an expansion of shellfish management/enforcement efforts.

As long as there is an effort to better manage shellfish, the monies raised can go to ODFW's general account. I do not, in general, support restricting the funds to very specific uses. Creating little monetary fiefdoms within the agency is not an effective way to manage the public's wildlife resource. Put another way, wildlife management should not be a popularity contest.

[bigshark]

Jennie
I'd like to know the source of your e-mail. Are you quoting what was said? Or better yet just ask that source what is their mission. I met a man on the beach who said he was a "Friend of Razors" and lives there at Gerhart. He seemed like a nice fellow but I couldn't quite get out of the conversation what they were up too. The impression I got from our conversation is the local residence feel they have a different idea as to who should have clams, how many and when. The local businesses needed to be taken care of he said, which I don't have a problem with if it dosen't mean cheating oregonians who don't live there. What ever they are up to I hope it is positive. I compliment them on getting up and doing something. I also realize that the legislature has the last word, but if it is not talked about now and the learning process started it will wind up another poorly thought out knee- jerk reaction law that didn't quit do what it was suppose to. SO, are the friends of razors for the resource or just another group who think they can take advantage of whats in their back yard?

[Jennie@ifish]

It's Matt Hunter, ODFW, and yes, a quote.

Here is more:

The Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission requested and informational report as to the status of the Clatsop Beach Razor Clam fishery after receiving a petition for an early closure due to potential increased wastage concerns. I gave the report at the June 7 meeting. I was explicitly told to not include any options or regulation changes in my informational report. The Oregon State Police also gave an informational report on the status of the Clatsop Beach enforcement. They were also told to just give the facts and to not express options or regulation changes. One has to remember that the Fish and Wildlife Commission is ODFW's rule making body and there are certain formalities that are required when giving a presentation to the commission. This is something I was not familiar with until I had to do 3 rounds of rehearsals for my presentation! The commission wants good solid data and science to back up any regulation change, in the case of the early closure for the Clatsop Beaches, ODFW had neither. The one bright note of that commission meeting was that the commission expressed their support for a shellfish license. Ultimately the decision to have a shellfish license has to come from the legislature and be sponsored by a group other than a management agency (ODFW). ODFW has sponsored shellfish licenses in the past and none were thought highly of in the state legislature. In other words this has got to come from the people who use the resource.

Recently, there has been the formation of a grassroots organization who would like to see a shellfish license with the funds going to management and enforcement. The group has had two meetings, at the first one I gave the same informational report I gave to the commission. At the second meeting the group devised a resolution and agreed to make contact with lobbyists in the natural resource field. The resolution reads as follows; "Be it known that Friends of the Razor Clam (FORC) unanimously supports proposed legislation before the Oregon House of Representatives that creates a statewide shellfish harvesting license; as long as the fees generated be earmarked for research and enforcement of shellfish harvesting. We define shellfish in the above legislation as clams, crabs and mussels."

Before a third meeting is to be planned the group wants to get a commitment from some of the local legislatures to attend a meeting.

Hope this helps.

Matt

[Straydog]

Actually, while this became a hot issue again this spring, the idea of having a shellfish (crabs included) license has been around for several years that I know of.

In fact, Lindsey Ball said that the department has been turned down several times in it's attempts to initiate this fee as the "coastal caucus" of legislatures have stopped bills in the past.

Given the budget situation we find ourselves in and the fact that the state currently supports a part time shellfish bio that is paid out of the gen. dept. budget, it seemed a good time to make another run at it.

The funds will be to help pay for a full time bio as well as gather the needed info to come up with and implement a management plan, is how I understand it from the discussion at the commission meeting in Medford this past spring.

Mr. Ball at that time said that a legislature from I believe Mollala (?) told him he would have a bill ready to present at the next session. (next regular session, not another special session)

We need to let our legisaltures, through the commisssion or otherwise, know our feelings on the idea.

[ 08-20-2002, 07:22 AM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

[bigshark]

Good, good and better. More power to them!
Now if we can get a few or even a couple of the big money donars to the politically empowered to see it this way we might get it done. Thank you Jennie for responding.

[ 08-19-2002, 06:41 PM: Message edited by: bigshark ]

[TheRogue]

Yikes....two times in one day that I'm agreeing with garyk, word for word!!! :wink: :wink: :wink:

Specialized funding sources rarely end up being the fix-all that the general public thinks they are. The "popularity contest" is exactly what it turns out to be, with some other important programs losing out.

This is a slightly different scenario, but look what's happened to the "Lottery For Parks" ballot measure that passed by one of the widest percentages in state history. Little by little, the general fund support gets whittled off the back end, instead of the Lottery funds being ADDED to the base general funding. It's so tough to guarantee anything with spineless legislatures doing whatever they can to get elected.........EXCEPT what needs to be done.

Off my soapbox........General License stays the same, $6 on to the Salmon/Steelhead/Halibut/Sturgeon tag, $12 for non-residents, $5 for a 2-day tag for clams/crabs only; sounds good to me. This way a crappie fisherperson in Vale isn't charged extra on their license supporting a resource he/she will likely never see.

My .02

[John]

I would be willing to pay an extra $10-20 for a salmon/steelhead/sturgeon tag, if the money goes to funding the ODFW, and not to the general fund. Also, it would not be to much to ask for folks clamming and crabbing to pay $10 for a shellfish harvest tag. The ODFW runs programs for shellfish and has for years. All the while people harvesting them have not had to have a license. The funds for these programs has come from fishing and hunting license fees

[Jerry Dove]

Yes their is a bill ready for the next reg. session of the leg.. Also mr Ball has said any money for spedial lic. will go toward what ever that lic. or tag is for. Jerry

[POS Clerk]

Straydog

I prefer to get my info in writing...

From:
http://www.dfw.state.or.us/ODFWhtml/Medford_min.pdf

"Q: I support raises in fees, but we [Northwest Sportfish Industry Association (NSIA)] would like
to see crabbers and clammers buy licenses also. NSIA is willing to help you lobby the
Legislature for this.
Ball: This would require an angling license for people harvesting shellfish. It was met
negatively by the Coastal Caucus of legislators in years past. Lately attitudes have started to
change, but this would only generate about $169,000 in revenue according to our economist,
Dr. Chris Carter. We have been trashed each of the 5 or 6 times we’ve brought this to the
Legislature, and I was not interested in doing it again. At EBAC, Bob Jacobson said we should
try again. Terry Thompson opposed this while he was in office and now he supports it. Since
then I met with legislators, and Senator Roger Beyer from Molalla told me he would have a bill
ready to go."

[bigshark]

I sure would be interesting to see the math on that $169,000 POS. Whatever assumptions are used seem a little suspect to me.

[WheresMyBobber]

Jen, I too thought about how I would pose such a question, and every way I thought of just raised more questions. I'm just trying to add to the discussion with the questions I posed. IMO any time we agree to a new tax (license fee), we need to be fully informed of how, why and where the money will be spent. As we all know, once a tax is in place, the price never goes down. graemlins/eek13.gif

That being said.....I would certainly support a shellfish license if the terms were right. It wouldn't be just to pad the coffers of the ODFW, nor would it be "because I have to have a fishing or hunting license, they should have to have a clamming license". (I am a clammer by the way).

I would support a shellfish license only if all monies collected went towards the maintence of the resource, enforcement of shellfish regulations, and included ALL shellfish. The incident cited in Tillamook recently is not an isolated incident. This type of behavior has been going on for a long time, affecting and depleting all of our shellfish. Also, I believe the license should be able to be purchased separately, or as part of a combined fishing/hunting/shellfish package.

A comprehensive plan that includes increased enforcement would have to have the enforcement spending spelled out in detail, as the State Police does the enforcement, not the ODFW. That money would need to be dedicated to enforcement, so Officers wouldn't be pulled away from this effort when/if their general budget gets cut.

I also believe we should follow Washingtons lead in more closely regulating the seasons. This would not only help to manage the resource, but would aid in enforcement.

graemlins/program.gif

[kampy]

Clams ,Crabs, baitfish, scuba harvest, and many other shared interest should have lic & controls. We all can share in the cost to maintain the various sportings we enjoy. Combinations tags could be the ticket.
If it's left alone, it will be abused by those who think it doesn't matter to others. What some may veiw as costing them, could also be considered as protecting them. It's all in how you veiw it. I'm not big on complicated regs nad a simple solution would be welcome. Wondering why Jen asked the Question? Why Not. BE IN FRONT OF THE ISSUE AND YOU MAY JUST FIND YOU'RE A PART OF THE RESOLVE. :smile:

[Straydog]

UUUmmmm, POS, I hate to burst your bubble but everything on here is in writing!
Oh, don't tell me, you hacked into a system that makes your computer convert these posts to oral presentations! :grin: :grin:

[WheresMyBobber]

Good discussion. It sounds like there's a lot more going on than I was aware of.

I particularly liked the following:

The resolution reads as follows; "Be it known that Friends of the Razor Clam (FORC) unanimously supports proposed legislation before the Oregon House of Representatives that creates a statewide shellfish harvesting license; as long as the fees generated be earmarked for research and enforcement of shellfish harvesting. We define shellfish in the above legislation as clams, crabs and mussels."
<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">And:

Yes their is a bill ready for the next reg. session of the leg.. Also mr Ball has said any money for spedial lic. will go toward what ever that lic. or tag is for.
<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">Even though dedicated money isn't as perfect as it may seem on the surface, it certainly helps. Giving new, undedicated money to govt. agencies is a sure way to get someone elses priorities funded, in my opinion.

[poshie]

:cool:
Back to the top.....

[poshie]

Hey Jen,,,
Is it possible to get 300-400- responses? :smile:

[Crashin' Bait]

I'm all for a clamming license, especially if the monies generated went specifically for enforcement and monitoring to protect our valuable resource. Like will_e_fish, I, too, would shell out some clams for clams. Sounds like a good deal.

[ 08-20-2002, 10:48 PM: Message edited by: Crashin' Bait ]

[will_e_fish]

I would be happy as a clam to pay many clams for big clams.
Hey does that mean we will be getting clam hatcherys too?
On a more serious note I hope the money goes to enforcement as well as enhancement not just a general fund.

[poshie]

:cool:
Another Day, another vote..

[roadsend]

A separate sport clamming licence makes sense for many of the reasons listed above. A separate commercial license also makes sense. As I understand it, any commercial fisherman can dig clams for sale without a daily bag limit. A separate license would tend to insure that folks digging are commited to the market and give the management folks a handle on how many commercial diggers are in the market etc.

[poshie]

:cool:
Another day.....surely we have more than 100 clammers? :cool:

[poshie]

:smile: :smile: I'd like to send 200 pollsters to ODWF.
Don't we have 200 clammers on ifish? :smile: :smile:

[GutshotApe]

Yes on a clam/crab license. Thousands of tourists and non-license buying Oregonians are getting a free ride now. The part-time clam bio and the OSP game cops enforcing shellfish regs are being subsidized by fishing & hunting license buyers, not general fund tax dollars. The legislature calls the shots on clam licenses or not and to date they have been unduly influenced by a few motel and trailer park owners who think a $5 or $10 license would cause their customers to go elsewhere. But, where would they go? The legislators respond to perceived votes. Is it time to flood them with letters & phonecalls? YES!

GutshotApe :cheers:

[Thumper]

As a free-rider Washingtonian I'd gladly pay for the privelige to clam.

[poshie]

:cool:
We all know that eventually there will be changes in fees and regulations. This is your chance to express your opinion and also to send a personal email to:
zanegreysmith@msn.com
of the ODWF. I will keep this popping up for another week and send the results to Zane.
Thanks to all who have already emailed and cast a vote. The new season is not far away and let's all be observant of some of the things that clammers have expressed on the board. :cool:

Dear Kathy:

I would be pleased to have you provide my e-mail address to those who might be interested in expressing views on the clamming issues. Please do.

Thanks to you and the others who are taking the time and initiative to do something about this matter. It helps!

Regards,

Zane <font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">

[Snakebite]

Here I go out on the edge again. This once again is my own personal opinion...not that of ODFW, so damn me if what I'm doing here is wrong!
The dept. has only one funded biologist to deal with the clam issue. Washington has many many more, or so I'm told.

The legislature has repeatedly, from what I've been told, rejected the desire of said Dept. to require a license for clamming or crabbing. The reason is, that the tourist industry lobby has strongly and successfully rejected the idea.

"My" opinion is that requiring a fishing license, like a one day or multiple day license (just like a tourist from Germany can get) to harvest clams or crabs, just like fish, will not hurt the tourist industry at all, and will (given the correct funding allocation) end up in much better protection and management of the resource, and make OUR opportunities more enriching. God help me if these comments get my butt in a sling.

[poshie]

:smile:
Snakebite....I hope that you email Zane with
your suggestions...no matter what has been said in the past.

[poshie]

:cool:
One more time around...and then it will be sent to Zane.
Thanks to those who have added their
opinions to this thread/poll.
Hopefully this also added insight to your perspective as you clam in the coming season and to be very protective of this tasty bounty soi that we and our grandkids may enjoy it from years to come. :cool:

[fishbait]

I have avoided this thread till now........

I have mixed feelings about a clam permit.......... Why should I, a native Oregonion pay for a priveledge that I have enjoyed for 40+ years, what do I get out of it? Ya, I know, our great state is in $ trouble and those of us that consume should pay to support the activities that we enjoy, but what's next, will we be required to get a fart permit for noxius emissions? :shocked: As a small business owner that has gone without a paychek on more than one occasion (6 months in 95) to be able to pay my staff, I have a problem with state and fed government refusing to cut expendurtures when the revenue is not here. If I ran my business like that, I would have been bankrupt 6 years ago.

Yes, I would pay for a clam permit if someone could show me how my money, and yours, would be used to beneifit the resource, and the expected return on investment, that is, how much my, say, $8.00 permit , after state misc. costs would go towards benefiting the resource. I have no problem with paying my fair share, sometime even more than my share caues I am often taking home limits, but I want the money spent wisely.......It's just another form of a tax. one that I think would be accepted and most likely be beneficial, but as a smell test, what would the late Gov. Tom Call say if he were to speak about this issue? Why is it necessary and how would it benefit the citizens of our great state? answer these two simple questions for me and I will give you and firm answer. ......... nuff said. FB

[poshie]

:smile: fishbait..I wasn't going to post anymore because I have had my opinions on here so much regarding this issue. But I have read it and
I for one am glad that you put in your opinion.
I think anytime that poachers need to be curbed then if a clam licence would provide the money for that, then I am for it. My choice of word poachers encompasses groups and individuals who simply cannot deal with a limit of 15.
I don't want to see a runaway licence fee and feel that if Washington can do it, so can Oregon.
Not knowing, fishbait, how many times you go,
and I will assume not as often as I, my frequent observations of blatant violations need to be stopped. It won't happen this season anyway, so let's be prepared for when this is brought up again.
And I am sorry, I have no clue how Gov. McCall
would have reacted :smile:

[Sturgeonbait]

Maybe they shold make it part of the punchcard to keep track of catches
:grin:

[Jennie@ifish]

WHEEEEEE HAAAAA~~~~

I worked all day on this!
Jerry, hope it's not too late to include this in your travels!!!

There is a bug in the mass move thing, when I archive? It loses the address to the polls, so you can't access them. Spent the day trying to get it fixed. We did it! Thanks to the folks at infopop! They wrote a script, and now we have our polls back in the archives! YAY!

So, feel free to vote in this, if you haven't already!
Thanks to POSH ll for noticing the need for this fix!
Jen

[Jennie@ifish]

Posh wanted me to move this to the top so that you could view it.
It's interesting, huh?
Jen

[freespool]

I would fully support a clam-crab permit system. As had been stated previously the funds being used to sustain the resource. What I would also like to see is no commercial razor clam harvesting,and the same type of limited openings,as is done in Washington.

[OceanBlue]

It is my understanding that this bill was passed on Wednesday and will go into effect in 2004

[poshie]

:cool: I thank Jen for finding this for review for those who were not around and are not familiar with the work history of ifishers on this issue.

[bigshark]

Wow.............a year has gone by already? Well, this resourse deserves as much attention and tender loving care as any other resourse we have. I for one hope this works out well !!!!!!!!