ODFW Budget

[Pete]

Kitzhaber has submitted his budget which includes submissions from agencies. ODFW head Jim Greer sumbitted his budget request which was incorporated into the State budget. There are some issues which I find alarming. Notably:
1) "The recommended budget reduces staffing by 7.5 positions and $834,305 resulting in the closure of Butte Falls, Rock Creek and Trask River hatcheries."
2) "Natural Fish Production Programs were reduced by $438,410, resulting in the elimination of cormorant hazing in north coast bays, reductions in supplies and services in the fish screening program..."

If the legislature chooses not to provide general funding or maintain current license fees, additional cuts are scheduled, including:
"- Salmon River Hatchery: End production of 500,000 coastal coho smolts of Siletz stock.
"- Closes Nehalem hatchery."
"All positions, services and supplies necessary to tag white sturgeon in the Columbia River coastal estuaries and recover these tags in sport fisheries would be eliminated"

It is essential that sports fishermen write letters of support or provide testimony during budget hearings. Take advantage of the "Who to write" page at http://www.ifish.net/write.html

Don't be left unheard when the dust settles.
The point is this, short term budget decisions may have severe, long term effects. If we don't keep our eye on the prize it may get snatched away. The price of a tag may change, but all citizens have a responsibility to protect our natural heritage whether that means studying sturgeon, hatchery supplementation or predator control. Some legislators seem more than happy to trade the health of our fisheries for short term political gains. Let them know this is unacceptable.

[This message has been edited by Pete (edited 12-05-2000).]

Thanks Pete. This is another good letter writing campaign cause. .... If all else fails to procure a sufffient budget, how many of you fishers would be willing to pay substantially more for steelhead/salmon license/tag fees? If it became necessary I would. It would still be a bargain for what we get. It might also reduce some fishing pressure from less serious fishers? - RT

[Boondoglin]

RT-
In Response to how many of us would be willing to pay increased fees for licenses and tags; of course I and many others would. The question is, why should we have to? Your comment that this might reduce some pressure by less serious fishers is in my opinion dark thinking. How would you like to hear Bill Gates say that they should raise the price of licenses and tags to a level only he and his buddies could afford.

The main issue is the total state budget, it's allocation, and the excessive taxation upon its citizens. Spend a little time in Salem or around many state agencies. The problem is not a shortage of State Government revenue, but rather the waste and misallocations of funding that leaves important programs like fish restoration in jepordy.

This great country was formed by people who were trying to excape other governments that oppressed their rights to fish and worship in their particular way. Remember that taxation was one of the worst forms of oppression that the founders of this great nation fought against.

Freedom to Thump Fish---Boondoglin a Blue Fox

[Clamman]

I find it alarming that certain individuals always are quick to blame budget shortfalls on waste. Budgets are set per biennium, that means they last for two years. It is next to impossible to determine what costs will elevate and which won't. If you people don't recall the price of gas has gone up almost 75% in the last year and a half. This along with many other unpredictable costs has severely hurt the ODFW budgets. Fish division alone is 2.1 million in the hole and a good chunk of that is legal fees to get seasons for YOU. This became an unavoidable cost when the A.G. department also became cash strapped for cash and no longer provided cases ala pro bono. The state has been in a hiring freeze for any positions that would be funded by the general fund, employees in ODFW have not had a cost of living for 2 years now and they are one of the lowest paid state biologist in the nation! The director is in charge of an agency with nearly 1500 employees (full time and seasonal) acts as the CEO, Chairman, and president yet makes under 85K a year? How many people in the private industry have that much resposibility and get paid so little? Why on earth do you think there so many biologists leaving? The extremely low pay and the negative stereotypes this state exhibits.

Yes Pete is right, alot of facilities and supplies will be lost. The NF Nehalem, The Salmon River Hatchery, Butte Falls, Rock Creek and the Trask. On the Columbia River, sturgeon tagging and sampling could disappear all together. That would mean much tighter restrictions (i.e short seasons). If you truly care about these facilities, write to the state legislators in your district. Tell them to overturn the sunset clause (license fee reduction) and continue funding these other facilities that you care about.

ISG

[This message has been edited by Ifish Special Guest (edited 12-04-2000).]

[Phish_on]

I'm always interested in specific examples when folks refer to

"waste and misallocations of funding"

Your elected representatives should be interested also.

[Boondoglin]

Phish_on,
You don't have to look far, as a matter of fact our elected officials have to look the other way to miss it. The DMV computer system, the Oregon health plan. It's actually sad, most of the state workers are honest hardworking people doing us a huge service. The problem is lawers and politians that don't have any of our best interests in mind.

[Phish_on]

I was looking more for exact expenditures or budget line items ... a lot of lessons were learned from the DMV computer fiasco, we hope.
Much of the waste comes from legislation aimed at a single issue or interest, which affects a much broader scope than intended.

[PeterMac]

Note that the NF Nehalem is included in K's budget proposal, as well as the Salmon River. Just a clarification. ISG, the second sentence in your last paragraph made it sound like it wasn't in the budget.

PeterMac