Extra rod permit could help fund hatcheries.

dogfishboy · 06-02-2002, 09:14 AM

After reading Bill Monroe's column in today�s paper I too am getting excited at the possibilities that are being brought to the table to fund hatcheries. In his column he says, �James Acock, a Portland-area guide, is one of many (including me) who would like an extra- rod permit.

�How about if we allow anglers to purchase up to two additional rod permits at a premium price, with all the proceeds to go directly to hatchery programs?" he said. �At $30 -$50 per license this is a win- win proposition, ODFW gets extra revenue, anglers get extra rods, and merchants sell more bait and equipment.�

"It makes not difference if an angler gets his limit in one hour or one day. He is still bound by the single-angler bag limit."

Monroe says, "numerous other states, after all, allow multiple rods, and if it's an enforcement issue ...what isn't? Even the cheapest calculator easily generates six figures if only a quarter of the salmon/steelhead anglers bits"

Budget shortfalls are getting larger every time I pick up a paper or listen to the news. Something bad is going to happen to the hatcheries soon, which directly translates to how we all like to spend our free time.

I know we (some of my fishin' buddies) have thought that this "extra rod permit" concept is a good idea. We have just never tied the proceeds to hatchery funds. I for one think this idea has serious merit and hope other ifishers feel this way too. There are always pros and cons regarding a new rule and implementation of a new system. I'd be interested to hear how some of you feel about extra rod permits and the funds going to hatcheries.

I don't know if this topic has been discussed here before, I often miss stuff when I'm out of town fishing and just don't have the patience to go back through all the pages of this busy DB. If so, it deserves our attention again.

Thanks, David

[ 06-02-2002, 10:20 AM: Message edited by: dogfishboy ]

Chris Nordling · 06-02-2002, 09:20 AM

Tell me more, tell me more :grin:

I'm down if the permit is good all year. I wonder if this would be available to guides as well ?

Chris

dogfishboy · 06-02-2002, 09:29 AM

Chris,
Could you see Andy Betnar's boat with six + clients and 12 to 16 lines in the water

:shocked: Can you say CF!

Sure why not, that is guides included. I'm guessing they already have there hands full when the boat is full. If they only have a couple clients it might be easier. I'm for it, if they pay the same as the sporties for each extra rod per person each time they take a different client out. They have a bigger stake in this than we do.

FEAR NO FISH! · 06-02-2002, 09:55 AM

That is a fantastic idea. We attempted to do it in Washington but the prima-donnas were against it, saying it was a social issue. Totally political. A lot of public sentiment against it saying it wasn't sporting. You can look it up on the WDFW site and see the arguments, pro and con. See page 40 of the 2002-2003 sportfishing rules concise explanatory statement. I hope you guys can get it passed ,then I would buy an Oregon License. You have to remember our state passed a law against using body grip traps. Smells like PETA

Chris Nordling · 06-02-2002, 10:01 AM

Well David, his boat IS big enough !
Might make for some interesting days in hoglines too ! Imagine the trout fisherman manning 2 rods, or how about the shad fisherman?
I've always thought that it shoud be o.k. to legally fish 2 rods, but then the hunters may want two guns. I always thought the idea would get "shot" down in a hurry, but if it seriously being entertained, that is way too cool.
On the other hand, that's a lot of reeling if you're alone plugging for steelies and get a double, or imagine a triple header of springers for 2 guys with 4 rods out. YEEE_HAAW !

Bring it on !

Chris

[ 06-02-2002, 11:02 AM: Message edited by: FWF1 ]

dogfishboy · 06-02-2002, 10:45 AM

A friend just emailed me and said, " What's up with the sudden change of mind. Your always complaining about those dough balls out there fishing two lines. What's different suddenly." I told that lurker

that in the past it was illegal and unfair if they decided to brake the law and the rest of us law-abiding citizens choose not to. That lawbreaker had a better chance at getting a fish than I did. I also told him that if it was legal and the bag limit stayed the same, I would have no problem with it.

The part of this that makes the most sense to me is that it doesn't really matter how fast you reach your limit. The limit is the limit. I know there are plenty of times when it wouldn't matter if I had 16 lines in the water, I still would go home fishless. They allow us to purchase hatchery tags now to keep as many fish as we can, why not an extra rod permit to catch hatchery fish. I may be way out in left field here and maybe there are a lot of negatives to this that I�m not understanding.

FnF, a lot of those PETA folks don't eat "faces." I've heard that if you don't eat meat you produce less body odor...but something sure stinks. [img]graemlins/idea.gif[/img] Think i'll go defrost an elk steak for lunch. Honey, lets bbq for lunch.

I think its great you would contribute to the success of our hatcheries by buying an Oregon license. I buy a Washington license so I can night fish... among other things.

Clackman · 06-02-2002, 12:53 PM

i would buy one

Fish-n-Fever · 06-02-2002, 01:42 PM

I think this is a great idea also and I believe it would be most entertaining to "watch" the combat fishermen and hog liners with twice as many lines in the water. It would'nt make much difference in the Ocean but on bank access areas where you now have from 50 feet of bank with 25 fisherpeople and 25 rods to 300 feet of bank and 150 rods double the rod numbers and you tell me if thats not "entertainment"!

Ron

[ 06-02-2002, 02:43 PM: Message edited by: Fish-n-Fever ]

crabbait · 06-02-2002, 02:25 PM

Fish'n fever - I agree with you on the bank issue. What happens when you hook up? You would need an alliance with your neighbor in order to get your "extra" line out of the way. It could work if people were willing to put the rods closer together. I'm afraid that the people who don't pay for the extra rod might have a probelm with sharing the bank with the two-rod guys.

As for fishing two rods out of the boat, I think I am for it considering that the money would go for a good cause.

As for guides, if the guide had the extra ticket and his client/s did not then you would only have one extra rod.

shakerfish · 06-02-2002, 02:34 PM

It sounds like fun too me ! lets do it!...shakerfish..

shakerfish · 06-02-2002, 02:36 PM

It sounds like fun too me ! lets do it!...shakerfish..

Johnson_Bar · 06-02-2002, 07:30 PM

Think what it would look like out on the ocean with the charter boats. Or how much fun it would be when someone trolls to close to you and they are a mile back [img]graemlins/icon_argue.gif[/img] . I can see that this would be very entertaining

.

Salmonator · 06-02-2002, 07:39 PM

I'm willing to bet that if this does go through that the charters and guides (especially the charters) won't fish more than one rod per person. You're likely to have a lower landed fish ratio with that many poles in the water tangling up. I can see one hot salmon tangling up 4 or 5 rods, and how much fishing are you going to get done while the crew is sorting out that mess...

SandySteel · 06-02-2002, 08:14 PM

I have frequently in the past wished as I was backtrollling with two guys in front of me in my driftboat that they could get off their lazy butts and fish!
I could just see my two fishing buddies drift fishing out to the side of the boat or dropping a bobber and jig into some tasty water off to the side of a run while I am working the jigglies out in front of us.
I would love to run another rod out in front of me while I am alone as well. It would mean covering more water and not giving fish the option of going around my plugs.
I think it could make bank angling some of the popular plunking spots a real zoo though.

Jerry Dove · 06-02-2002, 08:35 PM

Bill Monroe mentioned this to me before the Tillamook meeting, I just flat forgot to bring it up. Old age I guess. We need to flood the ODFW with letters of support before Fridays Commission Meeting. We also need people at the meeting, LOTS OF PEOPLE!! We know the nay sayers will be there. Friday June 7th. AM

DF · 06-02-2002, 09:06 PM

I like it! :grin:

Flatfish · 06-02-2002, 09:13 PM

So lemme see if I got this straight.I could fish 4 rods and not have to row 4 people.We do well with a full boat.Just tough holdin her in place.We call it the "Wall Of Death".
Who do I need to write or call.Can't make the meeting Friday.But I certianly will write those who need to hear it.
See you on the river.
Mark.

Thick-N-Thin · 06-02-2002, 09:26 PM

I like the idea as long as the catch limit stays the same. I can see some problems with the bank fisherman too. I would purchase one, but most likely wouldn't use it all the time. I doubt the guides or charters would allow a second pole if the boat was full for the same reason I wouldn't. Count me in!

[ 06-02-2002, 10:26 PM: Message edited by: Thick-N-Thin ]

dogfishboy · 06-02-2002, 09:31 PM

Flatfish, I had assumed that each angler would be limited to one extra rod permit. I suppose it could be set-up so you could buy as many as possible

I think a line needs to be drawn somewhere. One extra rod permit seems adequate to me. I don't want to be accused of being greedy.

Eric, I often feel like a lazy bum when I'm sitting up front... but the scenery is great. :tongue:

Small Fry · 06-02-2002, 09:31 PM

I would be open to this if the $$$$ aren't to high. I might save some time on the water.

spinnermaker · 06-02-2002, 10:19 PM

I think a lot people would go for that. Some of them I now that are not on here would love the 2 rod thing. Is it a sure thing or just a maybe. I don,t get the paper.

06-02-2002, 10:50 PM

I would use two rods for kokanee. :smile:

TheRogue · 06-03-2002, 05:21 AM

One for peelers, one for keepers.

One for shad, one for salmon.

One for coho, one for 'nooks.

Yep, I've got a letter written already!!

kyle

dogfishboy · 06-03-2002, 07:22 AM

Spinnermaker, this is just in the idea stage. As Jerry Dove suggested we should all attend the ODFW meeting Friday morning to express our support of this and other ideas that are on the table. Without a loud, collective voice, we can only sit back and take what we get.

I prefer to try to influence the outcome. Time to get off my fat ass and insure I can fish like I want to in my old age...which is still a few years away

June 7

ODFW Headquarters
Portland
2501 SW First Avenue
Portland, OR 97201

Director�s Report (8:00am -10:00am)

* Pending

Commissioner Items

* Revenue & Expenditure Report

Exhibit Items

* 2002-2003 Big Game Regulations by Larry Cooper, Don Whittaker, Jack Mortenson, Wildlife Division (Rule, Public Testimony)
* Access & Habitat 2003 Auction and Raffle Access & Habitat Projects � Funding Approval by Wildlife Division (Rule, Action, Public Testimony)
* Employee Pride Awards

Other Business

* Pending

------------------------------------------------------------------------

July 12

ODFW Headquarters
Portland
2501 SW First Avenue
Portland, OR 97201

Director�s Report (8:00am -10:00am)

* Pending

Commissioner Items

* Revenue & Expenditure Report

Exhibit Items

* Furbearing and Unprotected Mammal Regulations by Wildlife Division (Rule, Public Testimony)
* Lower Columbia River Coho Recovery Plan by Fish Division
* BPA Mitigation Briefing by Barnes, Wildlife (Information, Public Testimony)

Other Business

* Pending

Hope I see some of ya there.

FM2 · 06-03-2002, 09:16 AM

I think this is an idea with merit as long as the money collected is allocated to hatchery's which would require some type of check and balance system. This would also cost monies and require a staff to make sure the funds would go to the appropiate account.

As is known abuse is rampant with snaggers and others which there will always be a percentage of people who do this. I can see this type of policy being abused which points back to enforcement. What type of enforcement needs to be explored? if the permit fee is set to high I believe many people would not purchase a second permit and still fish two rods. With the lack of enforcement personnel and the current budget shortfalls a substantial fine amount could be a deterrent. A slap on the hand doesn't cut it which at the current disciplinary levels is about what it amounts too.

Ideas about how to identify a second rod should be investigated. I am thinking about some type of sticker much like ORV's use to identify their registration. Of course this raises many questions also, like what if I don't like the rod I am currently using and want to use another one, a rod breaks, or any of the obvious scenarios which could happen. Somehow a system should be in place and penalities should be stiff if a person is caught abusing a second rod permit.

Ideas are what's needed, ifishers can use this thread to generate solid ideas on how this idea could be incorporated so the hatchery's can continue to function.

Fishhead · 06-03-2002, 10:29 AM

How is it that this idea has'nt aready been brought up? What a great concept! I can't count how many times I was plunking and wished I could drift it too! I hope they can pass a law that lets us do that. I'm all for two rods to acquire my one or two fish limit. :grin: The sooner I get my limit the better. Then I can go back to bed...

:grin:

Get Bent · 06-03-2002, 10:39 AM

Next question: how much would you be willing to pay for that right to fish with a second rod?

Whopper Stopper · 06-03-2002, 10:44 AM

I'm down with this. The cheaters will always be cheaters and completely outnumber the inforcement arm. May as well allow the law-abiding fishermen to generate some more income if they choose. I do get nervous whenever we think up a new source of revenue for any branch of the Oregon political cog. I get visions of this hot new sorce of income ending up buying Kitzhaber new cigars! YOu have to lock it in!!!

FallRiverGuy · 06-03-2002, 10:54 AM

In principle the second rod is a great idea. Of course there are details such as what kind of fisheries a second rod would be allowed.

I was just at a Kokanee derby in California this past weekend. I bought an extra rod permit for $8. That is the yearly price. Most people whom lake fish in California, the ones I saw fish two rods. BTW it did not help me catch a bigger fish, but I did catch my limit sooner. :grin: I like fishing two rods (when I fish for kokanee) and wish I could in Oregon.

This is an excellent source of extra money for Oregon's fisheries. It is time to start thinking outside the box for funding. And I doubt any money that would come from this program will be around for our current governor to buy anything with.

[ 06-03-2002, 12:17 PM: Message edited by: FallRiverGuy ]

blackdog · 06-03-2002, 01:15 PM

Does anyone have any idea how many fishing licenses and/or salmon/steelhead tags the state of Oregon sells annually? What would be your guess as to how much money the permit would cost and how much money would it generate for our hatcheries?

bigshark · 06-03-2002, 01:52 PM

I will let the wife use one rod. I will use 20. If I fish with a whole school of bait my chances are I will not get out-fished any more. It's time to get even and make life more fair.

RJ · 06-03-2002, 03:09 PM

RJ's all for it ,as he was over a year ago when he posted the same topic,only this time it looks like the wave of sentiment is shifting,one permit per angler allowing one addittional rod to be used whether you choose to use it or not is your business.Those monies go directly to the support of hatcheries .RJ

TheRogue · 06-03-2002, 05:58 PM

I am absolutely for it!! However.....

For those legal-beagles here; How do you make sure that when this extra money comes in, the legislature just doesn't take the corresponding amount off the back end, ie, general fund $$??

Some of this has gone on with the state park system, after we Oregon voters agreed overwhelmingly to SUPPLEMENT, not REPLACE, the general fund $$ already in the system with lottery funds. Little nibble here, nibble there, pretty soon, the extra $$ are gone.

That'd be cool to fish one rod for legal sturgeon, and one for oversize. It would also be nice to be able to fish xtra rods when anchored up and plunking for salmon and steelhead (when there's enough room in the boat)

Why not go to the visible permit system, like Wa and their crabbing license?? If you're not wearing the permit visible, you darn well better not be fishing a second rod!!

My fee schedule: Xtra rod license $50.00 =$40 to hatcheries, $10 to enforcement.

Available to all types of fishing, non-residents same price, no 1-3 day discounts.

kyle

[ 06-03-2002, 07:02 PM: Message edited by: TheRogue ]

Mofish · 06-03-2002, 06:36 PM

Bottom Line.

Revap the Oregon Tax Code and put the $$ where they should go .

dan(or) · 06-03-2002, 07:32 PM

I would welcome the opportunity to fish with more than one pole. I used to live in Wisconsin where 3 poles per person was legal. Gladly pay the extra $$ however, and this is where we part, I would like to see some funding go for Walleyes. how about designating where the $$ go? Washington is on board supporting walleyes and it would be nice if Oregon would recognize the world class fishery they are in the process of killing. Walleyes are not the enemy....

dan

Timber · 06-03-2002, 07:46 PM

Why not! the enforcement issue isn,t even a issue it,s a COP OUT ha.if they are are checking you anyway how much trouble is it to ask for your extra rod permit which we know would be listed on your license anyway Tim

MasterCaster · 06-03-2002, 11:29 PM

I like the idea, I think it would be great to have another rod in the water in certain situations.

On the other hand it would definitely cause a lot of problems between fishermen out on the river in the more crowded places.

I would go for it and buy the extra rod permit as long as the money is going straight into the hatcheries. I dont think I would even use a second rod very often but if it keeps the fish in the rivers im all for it!

Jon :smile: :grin: :smile:

Biteme · 06-04-2002, 06:15 AM

I have fished in states where more than one rod per person is allowed and what I found out is that when you have extra rods in the water you actually have less time with your bait or lure in front of the fish because of all of the down time taking care of the mess that all of those lines create when the boat swings or a hooked fish crosses them. I came to the conclusion that at least for me personally I am better off to pay attention to the one rod and keep it fishing. I do agree that this would be a good idea to help fund hatchery programs and I see no reason why it would affect the fisheries in a negative manner. If someone thinks they have a better chance with two rods let them do it. I dont think you will ever see 12 or 14 rods sticking out of my boat however.

nwfish.com
"Astoria Keepers Coming Soon"

Seefood Man · 06-04-2002, 06:58 AM

I like the idea, however, I think down the road the monies will be deverted
"more important issues" like the general fund. :depressed:

Snapset · 06-04-2002, 09:37 AM

This is a fantastic idea, and I see no reason to limit the number of rods to 2. For Kokanee fishing, 2 rods means more than twice as many fish, and it also means you find where the fish are biting, and on what, twice as fast. 3 rods would triple the speed.

I almost exclusively drift fish for steelhead, so it wouldn't help me there. If this goes through though, I bet it won't be long before we see someone drift fishing with 2 rods rigged with electric reels and push button controls.

dogfishboy · 06-04-2002, 06:36 PM

I have a few concerns as I spend more time weighing the pros and cons of this potential scenario.

1. Are we instilling the wrong attitude in our youth that more is better? Some of the truly great experiences in life are the simple ones.

2. Will nonfishers have a negative impression of us? Will this come back to haunt us.

3. Most of all, will this forever change how WE view and approach our sport.

4. And last but not least, would we be forever taking some of the "sport" out of fishing.

I may be over analyzing this but it will be a fundamental change in our sport.

David

Point-of-Sale Clerk · 06-04-2002, 06:43 PM

dogfishboy

that is a great post

*** Clerk

dogfishboy · 06-04-2002, 08:47 PM

Thanks, ***.
My concern, after some thought, is that in our desire to help hatcheries, we might be fundamentally hurting the thing we love...or not. This is my dilemma.

garyk · 06-04-2002, 10:03 PM

Hey Dogfishboy, good posts. While you're in a contemplative mode, consider these as points 5 and 6 for your above list.

5. With such a scheme, you've basically just doubled the number of bank fishers (rods-times-two). Crowded, combat fishing is one of the favorite topics here. Just imagine what 2 rods would do.... You walk down to your favorite river hole and see six guys fishing. 'Not too bad' you figure, 'should be room for me'. Then you notice they've got six rods in bank-holders plunking in the head of the pool, and they're drift-fishing (or whatever) the rest of it. Instead of 6 people, it's like there's twelve there.

7. Do you want to put the state in the position of selling a 'fishing advantage'?

I suggest it's much simpler to pay a $5 surcharge, as has been suggested.

This avoids all the problems you've thought of and all the unintended consequences that are bound to happen.

Futhermore, the big picture isn't just hatchery funding. There have been and will be more deep cuts across the ODFW infrastructure. Lack of enforcement is another favorite complaint here. There's fewer game cops now than there was decades ago, and today there's a lot more people than back then. The reason for the lack of game cops is budget cuts.

So, while folks are worried about their favorite hatchery project, don't lose sight of the big picture.

[ 06-04-2002, 11:12 PM: Message edited by: garyk ]

dogfishboy · 06-04-2002, 10:48 PM

That's a pretty ugly scenario you paint garyk. I spend most of my time in a boat, but this last springer season I spent a lot of time plunking on a productive bank in our area with friends. Had this rule been in effect this spring, I can only imagine the scene. This is not the experience I want. The boat scenario is different though, and maybe what I had only been considering in my own mind at the time of my original support of the idea.

If it only takes a $5 surcharge to resolve the problem and keep hatcheries open that would be tremendous, but I fear the cost will be much higher. However this turns out, I have been motivated to get involved when it comes to our fisheries. I have spent the last several weeks and evenings writing and emailing letters and notes, like the one below, to as many folks as possible and will participate in meetings and events.

Thanks to Jen for making this easier with her write letters links page and her Save the Hatcheries/broodstock page

Dear Governor Kitzhaber,

With the upcoming budget shortfalls I am deeply concerned that our state hatcheries will suffer dire consequences. The resulting effect of these closures will have a significant impact on our state's livability. Local communities are struggling to insure that their hatcheries remain open, thus insuring the livability of their communities and livelihoods of individuals. Please do everything in your power to help these communities and keep our hatcheries open. Please support and encourage all methods to fund our hatcheries.

Thank you,

David Popma, Curator
World Forestry Center Museum
Portland, Oregon

address and phone deleted for this post

NorthRiverS · 06-05-2002, 08:21 AM

I'm all for an extra rod permit in a boat. I frequently fish alone, or with one other person. It would be great to have another line in the water. I also know if I was permitted two rods, I would go fishing more often, thus spend even more money on gear, launches,motels etc. Sounds like a "win" situation for the ODFW and the Oregon economy.

FallRiverGuy · 06-05-2002, 12:46 PM

Catch and Eat,

You are right, not every fishing situation will be conducive to a 2-rod rule. I doubt I would ever fish two rods from the bank. There examples in other states that allow two rods in which we could glean a good system.

It is a good idea overall.

dogfishboy · 06-05-2002, 09:31 PM

C&E, I'd been thinking what you suggested but didn�t think I should suggest it. Glad you did. "nonsequitur" great word

Hey, the earliest I beached the boat this spring to plunk was 2:15am

FallRiverGuy, good point. I'd be curious to see how it has worked for them at the policy level and in the field. I wish we had some Ifishers who had experienced this in those states.

CATCH AND EAT · 06-05-2002, 11:54 PM

This comment may tick a few folks off a little but it is not intended to offend. If I do offend please accept my appology in advance. Thanks.

I think the extra rod permit is fine if you are fishing from a boat. If you are fishing from the bank then I believe it to be a very bad idea. The banks are already very crowded and this would double the number of problems here. Then we will have more folks showing up at 12:00 midnight to setup for the day. :whazzup:

I fish from both the bank and a boat in the rivers and ocean so I do have a stake in what I am saying.

As far as a bad example, Nonsequator is my responce. The examples come from the fisherpersons not the rods. I have seen one rod fishers set the worst examples in snag fests on the rivers. Plus, with a one limit possesion who the heck cares?

Bring on the extra tag if it will help.