Good idea for hatchery funding?

[Jennie@ifish]

I was checking out a local ramp today, and met up with John Cook.
We started talking about hatchery funding and problems.
He had what I thought was a very interesting idea for funding.
Of course, we have come up with tons of ways to make money. The problem is that we need the legislature to pass a bill that the money be dedicated to what we need it dedicated to, whether it be hatcheries alone, or hatcheries AND river enhancement.

Anyway... here goes:

John thinks that we should make it mandatory to turn in last year's tag, in order to purchase your next tag.
Along with that, he proposes a $5.00 fee per fish tagged, that would be allocated funds for hatcheries.
Not only would this help us with a dedicated fund, but it would also provide the ODFW with more accurate catch stats for the previous year.

Whadya think?

I'm still liking the idea that we should allocate half (or at least an appropriate amount) of all funds raised for the hatcheries to river enhancement. That way, we are being responsible about taking steps to ensure our rivers are healthy for our wild runs, while satisfying the need for consumptive fisheries.

Anyway, I think this is a great money making idea for our hatchery predicament.
Jen

[Uglygreen]

No way it will work (day licence?, non resident?, and "oops I lost my licence"). Nice try though

UG

[ 11-01-2002, 05:36 PM: Message edited by: Uglygreen ]

[Flying Roast Beef]

After already buying a licence and tag? Hmm... it's a thought but I bet if we did it legislature would mysterioulsly obtain a pay increase.

[SSPey]

the only possible flaw is that if ODFW revenue is tied to tagged fish, then they are likely to divert money away from river restoration (which gets maybe 1% of total already) towards hatchery production because it increases their revenue in the short term.

of course, if the rivers were in better condition, then so would the runs, and we wouldn't be in this stinking mess. More money, upfront and even in the face of hatchery closures, needs to go to restoration.

OK. I've got the slicker on. Tomatoes incoming....

[dogfishboy]

Not to bad an idea. Like I said in another thread, its important to keep thinking "outside the box."

Maybe what is needed is a complete paradigm shift. Perhaps, hatcheries should be funded through an institution other than a governmental one. Any ideas on how this would work? Maybe it's already been considered and rejected.

[ampersat]

i could go for it, but either the regular license cost or the cost per fish would have to be lower. it's not a bad idea though. i'm interested in hearing more opinions on this one.

[Jerry Dove]

Please see my note under (would you buy a lottery ticket on a large native fish) . We are looking for all the ideas we can get to save our hatcheries.

[MasterCaster]

One thing I liked a lot that hasn't been brought up recently as far as money for hatcheries.......

Special river permits. If you want to fish the Nestucca you have to have the permit, fish the Wilson you have to have that permit, ect. That money could be used for funding the hatcheries and stream rehab. Each hatchery river should have its own permit. Then we would be paying for the fish we catch as well as supporting getting the streams and river back into shape to help the native wildlife.

Have a little card that has a list of the rivers you have paid for that you have to show with your license and tag to OSP. This way noone can complain that they are paying for something they don't use.

I say if you want to fish a river that has a hatchery run you should be paying to support that river. Ya I may end up paying a lot more but at least that money would be put back into the resource Im using and not wasted.

Just my .02

Jon :smile: :grin: :smile:

[rebell]

This is a idea to think about.

An angler is allowed to buy so many fish per year up to a determined amount, but no more. If you dont reach the amount you bought, THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT.

Keep thinking Jen! I believe you may be on the right track.

[Flatfish]

I am all for extra funding for hatcheries.How about a 2nd rod per angler?I would love to increase my opportunity for 20 bucks a head.What about a shellfish lic?
5 bucks per fish?Cmon.I am already punished by the IRS for doing better than they think I should.The more you make the more they take.Well folks life aint that way.We don't all make the same amount of money.We don't live in the same house.We don't catch the same number of fish.This is communist thinking in my eyes.Applied to my hobby.Why should I pay another tax because I have already fished(and paid taxes on the money that got me to this point,thousands of dollars.Tens of thousands of dollars)for 20 years.I paid for these hatcheries for the last 20 years.Why don't newbies pay for the next twenty in advance?Oh yeah thats right,because it would be UNFAIR.Learned to fish,got fairly good at it.And now you want to punish me for it.I don't think so.This is the same thinking that is behind the anti commercial fishers."I could catch more fish if those nets were not in the river' or "Those commercial fisherman don't pay as much per fish as I do.I am an economic asset and they are taking all of the fish".Boo Hoo.Sport anglers do not catch the few fish that are allocated to them.Thats right allocated.The commercials have a quota and so do you.Whether you know it or not.The ODFW knows what percentage of the remaining fish will be caught.We don't come close to getting them all.
You wanna double my harvest card cost.Fine.But don't make me pay 50 times what others do because they are not as good at it as I.I have the same opportunity as the rest of you folks.I am in the top 1%.Hard work,cold hands,egg goo on EVERYTHING,ans attention to detail have put me here.I do not owe you what you did not catch.If you want to tax me for being good at it,I will start taking a lot more guests along and let them pay,err tag my fish.I provide fish for something like 25 people on a regular basis.Should there be a tax on fish at Safeway?
I may sound like a braggart here and I am far from it.I have seen folks who seemed supernatural in their ability to pull fish from the water as if on command.I watch these folks fish,and see the definition of good angler.I attempt to mimic these folks.I learn from others because I try to eliminate my pride when fishing,and learn like a kid in school when I see someone doing it well.
End of rant.
Thank you for your time.
Have a nice day.
Please enclose a self addressed envelope.
Call someone who cares about your opinion.
My opinion is hot air interrupted by sounds.
Mark and the dog.

[bigfishon]

Why not just fix the problem rather than complain about it? Come January 1st rather than buying a tag and licence boycot the state (this would take some doing but could be done) take your 30+ dollars each and put it into a fund. Buy out the exsiting hatcherys or buy riverfront land and build new ones. If you got the intrest of enough people (I for one don't think that would be hard) it could be done. If no one bought a licence or tag for next year and then lined the banks to fish in protest I think the point would be made that people are ticked off about where their cash has been going. Almost everyone you talk to who hunts or fishes is fed up with their money going into "the general fund" it don't do us no good so why are we paying up to them? If we ran the show you would have volunteers up to your neck trying to make it all work, and it would work in time.

[Point-of-Sale Clerk]

Other's ideas

http://www.dfw.state.or.us/ODFWhtml/...enue_mtgs.html

[Jooky]

maybe the state should just manage the money they have now better

[Clackman]

i dont agree with the per fish charge unless i was selling them wich i can not. but for comm.i believe a per fish fee is correct.every other business including mine has to pay for each unit of what ever we sell not one price as many as we want.

[k9jeff]

Im with Jooky,,, The state does not have a budget problem,, they have a spening problem. When they run out of money they threaten to cut schools and public safety or anything else that is near and dear to a large populations heart. This needs to stop!!!
Keep this in mind when you vote!

Jeff

[WP]

I don't like the idea of a per fish charge. I would not mind a per day charge, but that would be unmanageable. I think that we might consider what some of the Canadian northern lodges have started to do...build their own hatcheries! It is not so far fetched to develop fishery projects with the cooperation of the fisheries folks. The stream rehab efforts of private organizations have covered some of the inadequacies of govermental policy and "short falls" in funding. Why can't we build and manage hatcheries on our favorite streams? We could even petition to have control of streams before we re-build the runs on them...even buy the land....I agree that we need to look outside the current opions and government control to really put effective change into place...enough rants.
WP

[You Betcha]

How about the state harvesting all the surplus fish at the dams and selling them to pay for improvement of the runs. This would eliminate gillnetters getting their beer money but thats life.

[Straydog]

Considering the folks on here are what I would call the "hardcores" of our sport and the reactions I am reading, I am confident in saying the public outcry from the masses would be heard clear around the world for a pay per fish approach althouhg I like the idea of thinking outside the box!

On the other hand, it would sure be fun to watch the *** clerks of the world dodge the bullets they would have to dodge when folks turned in their tags and were told to "pay up."!
:grin: :grin:

Some thought asking for Social Security Numbers was dangerous, wait until they are asked to collect this fee too! Our retailers take it in the pocket book as it is by being license agents, think what their medical insurance would cost them in this system!! :grin:

[ 11-02-2002, 09:49 AM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

[speyfly]

How about paying for the true cost of that hatchery fish! $100/fish, $200/fish? What is the real number? Hatcheries are a waste of money untill we address the Nates and their home waters problems. If hatcheries are such a good thing, why are our Nates dissapearing?

You guys and gals just want to get yours now and in your short sightedness, care nothing about the future.

[ 11-02-2002, 10:10 AM: Message edited by: speyfly ]

[FM2]

Get the hatcheries out of government control, this is a reason why they could be in such turmoil today! Obviously the government can't do it right so what loss is there to consider turning control over to a managed private company that is accountable.

Time to think outside the box, not stay inside and try to put band-aids on the problem. I think it's time to look down the road to save other hatcheries that may be tied into the general fund and try to brainstorm ideas which can save them!

[Wright Angle]

How come everything always has to cost more?

when I was young I could drive up into the cascades and play in the snow. Park along the highway somewhere and play on a logging road. Now I have to pay because I'm in the snow area (Parking Permit). In the 60's and 70's the state seemed to get by fine without that, but they can't make ends meet now without all kinds a of new taxes ie. snow parking permits, mountain zone parking permits, all the city and county boat ramps that were free, now you pay. I bet someday you'll have to pay(Parking Permit) to go to big blue and walk on the beach! When will they have enough? how long before they tax the air we breath? Yes there was a time because this is America that you could go play in the snow or hike in the mountains and it was free, not now. So many hidden taxes If we only knew what are real total tax burden was.
Now our city charges the local P.U.D a tax each mouth for pole's that are touching city property, the pud passes it on to us. I see on my phone bill there is a federal tax so poor people can have a free phone.

Even when we vote in laws that limit taxes they find a workaround. The year measure 5 passed my property taxes were about $1250.00 a year, the first year of measure 5 my taxes went up to around $1800.00 a year. then as measure 5 kicked in my taxes were still around $1300.00 a year (same as I was paying before, It's just now it doesn't go to the schools). taxes, taxes, taxes, Well that's enough ranting. sorry

Twenty years ago the hatch box program looked like it was working to me, at very little cost to the state. I had alot of friends that had boxes on their property with lots of fish coming back each year. One friend had fish coming up the ditch in front of his house out of the river two hundred yards above his box, what a sight!
Each year the high school wood shop built several hatch boxes for people in the area (Local company donated the materials).I'm not sure what happened to the hatch box program but it was cost effective over building multimillion-dollar hatchery. I don't know for sure but it looked like it was working to me. Sometimes it seems like they don't want the fish runs to recover! Afraid of losing the federal money maybe?

[ 12-26-2002, 02:44 PM: Message edited by: Wright Angle ]

[Jennie@ifish]

Interesting...

I learn to much about politics on ifish.

I think I'll shut it down. :smile:

YUCK! Now I know why I have played the piano for politicians, closed my piano book, went to McDonalds, instead of enjoying a "Free $500" a plate breakfast, and was long gone and out of the door for the "meeting" part.

I am much happier with blindfolds on. :smile:

Jen

[Miss B Haven]

I'm afraid charging per fish caught on the tag would greatly increase illegal (no tagging/lost tag - oops) actvity. I crertainly support some of the ideas expressed on the link above, esp. the shellfish fee. Why should out of state folks come here and crab for free! (I'll pay my dues too!) :smile:

[Miss B Haven]

Know that I've thought about this a little (and had some coffee), I belive the better way to do this (relates back to fee increases too) would be to reduce the number of fish allowed on the first tag and increase the tags fees a little. That would allow folks who fish and catch a lot to pay there way and more casual fishers would not get hit. :grin:

[fish-on]

another good idea would be to allocate the money from the licenses and tags directly to the hatcheries instead of going to the general, then being dispersed to the hatcheries.With this all the money that comes from the tags and license is all there, thus being no excuse not to have enough money to support our hatcheries.
WE NEED TO get the Hatchery funds out of the general fund and have a separate allocation of money for them , this will help.I am willing to pay an extra $ 5 -%10 to help out just as long as I know that that money is going strictly to the hatcheries and no where else .

[ 11-03-2002, 08:09 PM: Message edited by: fish-on ]

[PapaHog]

I would think that MasterCaster may have a good idea. To increase revenue by a healthy river charge.

Pay for what you use seems to be a fair way to go.

If the river has a hatchery then money is for hatchery and restoration. If no hatchery then the money will be spent on habitat restoration.

River use fee???? hmmmm maybe maybe not :whazzup:

[Jerry Dove]

Jen, I hope you are keeping all these comments, print them and we will use them when the time is right....God sweetie, what would we do with out you. Thanks for the update on Gary.

[garyk]

With 90%-plus of the Fish Division's budget now spent on hatchery operations, I would suggest looking at ways to make the existing money go futher, and one thing not suggested yet is consolidating hatchery operations. Seems like this is always being recomended for schools and the like.

Consolidation would increase effeciency and reduce redundancy.

[Grits]

I think a per fish fee is a dangerous road to go down. Although I am lucky enough to afford this type of fee there are many that aren’t and I can remember a time in my life when I couldn’t. One of the things that I appreciate about the outdoors in our country is the accessibility to all but fees like these endanger that.

I also draw on my experience from North Carolina where just three years ago I paid $40 for the privilege of shooting 6 deer, a bear, 2 turkeys, a hog and my hunting/fishing license. The abundance of game and fish was remarkable compared to Oregon. What are they doing right that we aren’t?

The key to fishing’s future is to have as many people from a variety of backgrounds have a stake in its success. If we start pricing out younger generations or making it to expensive for families then who will be left to support it in the future?

I wish I had an easy solution but I think it will take some type of foundation that we can all voluntarily donate to but does not limit access to those who don’t donate.

[GutshotApe]

Grits - For one thing, they don't have 25,000+ cougars living off the deer herds in NC. Plus no elk competing with deer, better overall habitat for deer & turkeys, etc; more low-elevation land, no big winter range & winterkill problems, many woodlots with small farms interspersed, many properties managed for wildlife (foodplots) etc, etc.