So, as this discussion morphed into a pissing contest over what various organizations did or did not do in respect to how the Discover Pass was created and who paid and which organization received how much of the proceeds who has gained and who has lost? (Rhetorical question - no responses needed or desired) I am convinced that the result has not been positive change from constructive discussion/criticism. Very unfortunate!

From my perspective the real issue here is that we have just seen WDFW devalue the VAP to zero by referring to it as complimentary and therefore at least giving the impression that NONE of the license fees we pay will go toward maintenance. That could mean that WDFW will rely solely upon its 8% of the $30.00 ($2.40 gross before any administrative fee deducts) coming in from each sold Discover Pass for WDFW's maintenance program. If that is the case (and I hope I am wrong) I doubt that we will see any improvements in the field.

I believe Director Anderson should address this issue rather than allow the Department's major stakeholders to perceive that they have been disinfranchised. That action would be entirely within the perview of the Department under the concept of transparent Government. Here's hoping.

Well said, Larry. Honest, straightforward, no spin.

Dogfish- I answered your question and stand by my statement that I will not second guess those that made the decision here on the internet, especially to someone that is throwing a tantrum.

I know Ron and Bear also and would not for the life of me come on here and rant and rave about what has occurred down in Olympia and what part they had in it,especially since I was not there! Good men both, bad decision, that remains to be seen.

And very well said Larry.

Fishy

Bravo!!!! & Well Stated. The only thing that I could possibly add of value would be, "That action would be entirely within the perview of the Department under the concept of transparent and Accountable Government."

SSF.

How many people attacked me when I stated my opinion? Count them. I was referred to as:

1. A liar.
2. Not being genuine as to where my interests lie.
3. I support gillnetting and over fishing by the Quinaults.
4. I am a shill for a legislator.
5. That my penis size was being brought into question.
6. That my reps are powerless without the help of the CCA, yet I am capable of single handedly bringing down the CCA. (Got a phone call on that one from Lead Bouncer. Need proof? I have a call log.)
7. Being wrong multiple times, yet refuted other peoples errors and proved my statements were correct with facts.
8. Being guilty of commiting a homosexual act.
9. Ignoring reality by probably the most clueless person here.
10. Giving special treatment to Blake in exchange for legislation I am in support of, and not calling him out on issues publicly.
11. Being a bad banker who can't do math.
12. Treating my friends poorly, who said many of the things above to me.

So because I state my opinion I deserve this? Denial, deflection, and defamation is how I was treated by rank and file members of the CCA. I show people they were wrong and they do the crap up above. If people pile on me and end up getting IBS'd, in your words, too bad. Call it a tantrum if you want. I'll give you that. Start a fight with me, and the gloves come off.

Instead of holding me accountable for bringing down CCA, why not hold your organization accountable? If membership leaves in droves because of their actions, then maybe, just maybe, they weren't properly supporting the views of their membership.

I only asked a question and when I did say something to the effect of IBS I was quick to point out that it was meant entirely in jest as everyone can tell that you and Marsha know each other.

Other than this I will have nothing more to say on this topic here and will ask my own questions face to face.


Fishy

Andy - That was a sisyphean task. But we all know who won. Well almost all of us know.

Good Damn Stam idea!