Just saw on the WDFW home page that there is going to be a 10 dollar fee for extra catch record cards and replacement cards along with a 2 or 3 dollar fee for enhanced redtide monitoring. This will start July 1st, so if you have not bought your license yet, do it by the end of June. Every year more fees, less fishing opportunity. I hope Gary Gridlock eats a redtide clam and craps his head out of his rump.

Yep! More money to the general fund and no more money to restoring our fish runs! When will the people ever learn? It's not the fish, it's about money!

But you can count on it; there will be those same "jerks" that will try to justify this move.

When will they ever wake up?? And this board wonders why we keep getting more poachers!!

Can anyone tell us why it had to be a $10 rise, why not a $2 or $5 rise? How can people be so damn stupid?


Cowlitzfisherman

The $10 added fee for additonal salmon punch cards was a law recently passed and it specifically ensures that the $10 goes to the WDFW budget for salmon enhancement programs and nothing else. You suspicion about the money going to the general fund is unfounded. In past years the $10 was added to the salmon license for the in-sound blackmouth fishery but the money was gobbled up by the general fund. Not so now. Plus this only applies if you fill a punch card with retained fish and want to catch and keep another punch card full.

Grandpa

You may right, but what was the "law" that was supposedly pasted so that we can verify what you have said is correct?

I just need to see it before I believe it! You may be right, and you may be wrong! Can you give me a little bit more so that I can verify it?

Even if you are right , why the $10 figure?

Thanks,

Cowlitzfisherman

I believe it was House Bill 1725.

I do not mind the additional 2-3 dollars for the shellfish monitoring, but I would hate it if I lived in Spokane or Walla Walla and never seen a shellfish of any kind, why not just add it to the shellfish licence or the combo.
When I'm lucky enough to need another punch card, I think 10 bucks for 20 salmon is a good deal, .50 cents a fish, I'll take that.

NEN

SECOND SUBSTITUTE HOUSE BILL 1725

_AS AMENDED BY THE SENATE


Passed Legislature - 2003 Regular Session


State of Washington 58th Legislature 2003 Regular Session


By House Committee on Appropriations (originally sponsored by Representatives Cooper and Upthegrove)


READ FIRST TIME 03/10/03.




AN ACT Relating to catch record cards; amending RCW 77.32.430 and 77.32.256; and providing an effective date.


BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:


Sec. 1. RCW 77.32.430 and 1998 c 191 s 5 are each amended to read as follows:

(1) Catch record cards necessary for proper management of the state's food fish and game fish species and shellfish resources shall be administered under rules adopted by the commission and issued at no charge for the initial catch record card and ten dollars for each subsequent catch record card. A duplicate catch record costs ten dollars.

(2) Catch record cards issued with affixed temporary short-term charter stamp licenses are not subject to the ten-dollar charge as provided in this section. Charter boat or guide operators issuing temporary short-term charter stamp licenses shall affix the stamp to each catch record card issued before fishing commences. Catch record cards issued with a temporary short-term charter stamp are valid for two consecutive days.

(3) The department shall include provisions for recording marked and unmarked salmon in catch record cards issued after March 31, 2004.

(4) The funds received from the sale of catch record cards must be deposited into the wildlife fund.


Sec. 2. RCW 77.32.256 and 2002 c 222 s 1 are each amended to read as follows:

The director shall by rule establish the conditions and fees for issuance of duplicate licenses, rebates, permits, tags, and stamps required by this chapter. The fee for duplicate licenses, rebates, permits, tags, and stamps, except catch record cards, may not exceed the actual cost to the department for issuing the duplicate.


NEW SECTION. Sec. 3. This act takes effect April 1, 2004.

Grandpa, good job. I know you are not particularly in favor of Govt. in general and have some strong feelings about the regime in power in Olympia, wonderful to see at least one conservative willing to be fair and honest. (that may be a backhanded compliment but it truly is a compliment to you)

eddie

Glad to see you standing guard to keep me honest. By the way...Ralph Nader also lost as did Pat Buchanan

But I think that Pat Paulsen took at least one county

Washington State vote count in 2000 presidential election:


Ralph Nader Winona LaDuke Green 103,002 4.14% 0
Harry Browne Art Olivier Libertarian 13,135 0.53% 0
Patrick Buchanan Ezola Foster Freedom 7,171 0.29% 0
John Hagelin Nat Goldhaber Natl. Law 2,927 0.12% 0
Other - - 4,682 0.19% ..........

That means 4,682 could have voted for Pat Paulsen or perhaps Fidel Castro....I think that if Fidel ran for a seat on the Seattle City Council or maybe for the governorship he might win in a landslide. Just think of it: Fidel would not only close ALL the hatcheries but he would probably execute all the hatchery employees too. Anyone caught with a wild fish or fishing without a fly rod would be put before a firing squad. Oh the grand possibilities....goon squads would go door to door confiscating all fishing equipment unless you could show a special card validating that you belong to an authorized organization.

So grandpa, all that new punch card money now goes directly into the "wildlife funds", right? So does that mean that WDFW can go out and buy another 10 new trucks that run $30,000 each, or does that mean that our fishing money can pay out ten's of thousands more of our wildlife dollars to "help" paid for some poor rancher in eastern Washington that owns 3000 acres to help keep out all of those elk herds from eating his hay?

The way I read that bill, it does nothing to enhance, or help the recover of our fisheries. Well maybe they can use it to give groups like WT another $58,000! Didn't that money come from our wildlife funds also? After all, wasn't the suit filled directly against all the persons who were in charge of our wildlife i.e. "JEFFREY P. KOENINGS; WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE; WASHINGTON FISH AND WILDLIFE COMMISSION; RUSS CAHILL; WILL ROEHL, RON OZMENT, LISA PELLY, DAWN REYNOLDS, FRED SHIOSAKI, BOB TUCK, R.P. VAN GYTENBEEK, and KELLY WHITE"?

Am I reading this bill wrong or am I missing something here?

That money is being collected as a direct TAX on fishing for additional salmon and that money should have been mandated to improve salmon fishing and not to feed the endless WDFW "Black Hole".

Cowlitzfisherman

Aunty

I know that you were going to disagree with what I had posted on this one, but putting that aside, don't you think that the additional money that WDFW gets from this TAX should go back into enhancing our "salmon" runs, especially when the money has come directly from the sales of salmon cards?

PS, come down here to Lewis or Clark County and see how many "Old beaters" the WDFW is driving around here!

Cowlitzfisherman

I am with Aunty this one... At least the money will be staying the the department.

As far as a fee for extra punch cards, I would have like to seen it a little higher provided it strictly went for enhancement and/or recovery.
However, I feel that poaching is going to increase (not noting the catch on the card).

It is a voracious cycle isn't it?

The way I understand the origins of this law it was to help ensure that the $10 we have already been paying for the blackmouth that are raised in Puget Sound stays in that program. Doesn't spell it out that way in the bill but that is how I understood the intent when PSA helped get it to a vote.

CFM, last time I looked there were halibut, sturgeon, crab, steelhead, and salmon on that little card. Sounds like the money should go to pay for management and enhancement of all those species. Enforcement too. Hey, that sounds like the WDFW black hole

And if we want to cover all the costs for running the black hole out of licenses be prepared to fork over $1000 or more a year - the vast majority of WDFW's budget still comes from the general fund. And by the way, WDFW runs on about 2 tenths of one percent of the state budget. Want to save state money go after the big three, DSHS, DOC, and DOT. Better yet, elect Senators and Reps who can get the job done in the regular session - they spent more money on the extra legislative session than WDFW spends all year.

Hummmmm still no answers to my original questions! Lots of reaction in defense, but still no answers to my questions!

Grandpa, hear what you have just said! You said "Doesn't spell it out that way in the bill but that is how I understood the intent when PSA helped get it to a vote." Why was this keep so quite on this board if PSA wanted the sportsmens support? The "intent" is only about money, and nothing else!

Spawnout, you say; "last time I looked there were halibut, sturgeon, crab, steelhead, and salmon on that little card. Sounds like the money should go to pay for management and enhancement of all those species. Enforcement too. Hey, that sounds like the WDFW black hole"

Well maybe! When do you think that WDFW started charging you extra to catch a crab? You seem to be a really smart guy, so tell me, what did the WDFW do to enhance the crab or its fishery for the sportsmen? Oh, I forgot WDFW plants millions of crabs every year . . . yea, right!

The main reason why so many of our fish species are now endangered is directly related to the mismanagement of our WDFW, and other state and federal agencies that were supposed to protect them in the first place! Who do you think controlled the WDF all those years that the commercials racked our resources (I thought I herd you once say that you were a hatchery manager in Oregon)?

Don't forget, it was not that long ago that we had 2 entirely separate and different agencies (i.e. WDF, WDG). Wildlife (WDG) did care about our steelhead, and our game, but WDF only cared about the commercial industry then. Before you bark, you should do your homework and see where all the "old" directors of WDF had ended up after they retired from their state jobs!

Do you really think that the internal battle between the old WDF and the WDW are over and gone?

While you are trying to answer that one, Please tell me how you can explain your statement" And if we want to cover all the costs for running the black hole out of licenses be prepared to fork over $1000 or more a year". . . What about all the money that is spent on saving the butterfly's or the grasshoppers that everybody in the Seattle area wants to save? Do they pay for all the studies, court cases, and the other entire BS that our WDFW has to address? No, we have to pay for it all out of our wildlife funds!

Finally, you say that; "And by the way, WDFW runs on about 2 tenths of one percent of the state budget." Well, that sounds about right for what they do! About 90% of what they are getting paid to do, nature has done it for free for eons!!! They have mismanaged what nature has done for free, and we and the fish continue to pay for their errors. When will we ever learn?

O.K, go for it guys, I know that you just can't wait to attack me for what is the truth! Put your best spin on it, because you and I will be paying for it for a long . . . long time!

I know that my post will make many of you very unhappy, but I am willing to discuss our differences of opinions. WDFW is not a bad agency, but they have done some pretty bad things that I personally can document. So it's time for them to step up and do what is right without the sportsmen paying more for their mistakes!

Cowlitzfisherman

It is exactly because of mismanagement in the past that a bill like 1725 was offered. To try one step at a time to get back accountablility in WDFW and also keep the politicians away from the checkbook. Now we have made a few inroads this year and gained alot of knowledge about the process so we can come back next year better prepared to advance other legislation that will ultimately benefit the sports fishers of this state. Many fishing related organizations are gaining momentum and a louder voice for change. Many things are being done outside of this hallowed BB for the good of our sport. I suspect many watching and participating in this forum have helped along the way. So many are volunteers (not paid spokesmen) that we must understand the limitations and do the best we can.

Forget the vaseline! You won't be able to afford it in this year of "No New Taxes". I'd suggest you start saving the old grease each time you repack the trailer wheelbearings.


This could become a lengthy rant, but it won't. In my opinion, Cowlitzfisherman is right on. Many sportsmen have been around long enough, and seen enough, to believe the acronym WDFW actually stands for "We Done Fk'dup Washington." Those people fail to give our politicians, the lobbyists who elected them, and the bureaucrats who serve them the credit they deserve. If this statement seems a bit jaded, it's probably because my hunting/fishing partner, who was a very effective lobbyist in Olympia, and DC, used to keep me awake on long eastern WA drives by telling me "Olympia Exposed" stories.

I'll sign off with a couple of questions: What percent of clams, crabs, mussels, etc. are taken yearly by commercial shellfishers? How much were their fees increased to pay for biotoxin monitoring? I have no objection to a fair user fee, as long as ALL users pay their share. Are we sportsmen subsidizing the commercial sector, yet again?

Remember...pack those bearings, save that grease, and be prepared to look behind you for an Olympia politician every time you bend over to beach a fish, dig a clam, or pull a crab pot

You are pretty much right on about the politicians but remember that the people of this state keep electing the same type of scoundrels over and over again. There are a few who help with the sports sector of fishing issues but most are horse's azzes who shouldn't be elected in the first place. I think groups like RFA and PSA are starting to make a dent in things along with so many other fishing clubs that so many concerned sports fishers belong to. Maybe some who complain the loudest should do the following:

A. Quit voting for the wrong people

B. Join an organization that is working to promote sports fishing.

C. Next time you have a chance to voice your opinion on legislation that affects you and your right to fish, send a letter or an email or pick up the phone and tell the politicians what you want. It does make a big difference.

The one thing I can say about commercial fishermen as a compliment is that they are always at the table when things are being discussed that will matter to them. They have always spoken louder than the sports community so it is no surprise that they win more than we do.