Author Topic: Can you believe this??? (Read 8391 times)

marshrat · « **Reply #30 on:** Dec 10, 2007, 09:16 PM »

Quote from: the_mad_iceman on Dec 09, 2007, 11:46 AM

you're right, but at least I know what I bought with my money... NY is alot different the way the fishing and hunting is concerned. Better fisheries, more public lakes to fish... I was just amazed that there was actually a sticker like that... I think I'd run the guy off the road that had it on his car...LOL

Well you would be running the stocking truck off the road. I see nothing wrong with a raise in price. I can never get anywhere near the amount of pleasure out of the 70 dollars I spend a year in a NY and PA fishing license. I fish fish commission lakes and they take good care of us with their trout stocking during icefishing. When you can go to a lake and catch 100 trout in a day I will never complain. I don't agree with the kids fee that is crazy.

PS Mo where on Pine creek did your kids get harassed

boatnik13 · « **Reply #31 on:** Dec 10, 2007, 09:29 PM »

Quote from: slider on Dec 10, 2007, 07:23 PM

"and i agrtee with the comment earlier why do they buy big suv's for them to drive aroundin and this isnt just the fish commission.you see big durangos quad cab 4x4' with one person in them./and iot isnt just the cost of the vehicle how about the 15 mpg they get.
I wouldnt mind a increase in license but before its done ,show us where your going to cut overhead where its needed.

Not all of us can afford a extra car for the days we don't need the 4X4's but when we need them 4x4's we want power. I don't want a 2 cylinder engine pulling my boat especially if its HOT out. I'm just taking a stab that your talking about all the big suv's with one person driving. I'm not for mass transit yet.

jig-jig THUMP · « **Reply #32 on:** Dec 10, 2007, 09:38 PM »

I don't mind paying my fair share for the privilege of enjoying the lakes, rivers, and streams in PA. I'll even pay a little extra so a kid or an older guy (who's probably fishing 5 times as much as me) can get a price break (as in "NO CHARGE" for the kids). But for the same sake I expect that my money is spent only on fisheries conservation, handicap and boat access, public ammenities, and game law enforcement. Some of these can be partially funded by other sources (not fishermen) who also make use of these features. I'd like to know that my/our license dollars don't get swept up and used elsewhere non-related to the items above. And I also expect the stocked trout fishermen to fund their own fun if that is what they like to do. If it cost so much to raise a trout to a size so it can be released and have a guy catch it 2 days later then let those guys who enjoy this pay for it all. I want no part of this and do not care to pay for any part of it. The Trout Stamp fee should be based on this concept.

jjT

the_mad_iceman · « **Reply #33 on:** Dec 10, 2007, 10:47 PM »

Quote from: boatnik13 on Dec 10, 2007, 09:29 PM

Not all of us can afford a extra car for the days we don't need the 4X4's but when we need them 4x4's we want power. I don't want a 2 cylinder engine pulling my boat especially if its HOT out. I'm just taking a stab that your talking about all the big suv's with one person driving. I'm not for mass transit yet.

Boatnik, they're talking about the Fish Commission Officers driving around in the big trucks... not us

Byron/PA · « **Reply #34 on:** Dec 11, 2007, 03:16 PM »

I'm just having fun with this, no need to get upset.

Quote

Do you think its fair for my sister and her boyfriend (Both in college with no job) to spend over $50 each on a license just to go fishing on a state lake once or twice a year, and they don't harvest trout?

I really hope they are not attending a state university that my tax dollars help support, especially if there is a sports team involved, talk about unfair

In all seriousness, it doesn't seem fair, but how do you be fair in that situation??

marshrat · « **Reply #35 on:** Dec 11, 2007, 03:27 PM »

Quote from: jig-jig THUMP on Dec 10, 2007, 09:38 PM

And I also expect the stocked trout fishermen to fund their own fun if that is what they like to do. If it cost so much to raise a trout to a size so it can be released and have a guy catch it 2 days later then let those guys who enjoy this pay for it all. I want no part of this and do not care to pay for any part of it. The Trout Stamp fee should be based on this concept.
jjT

It is based on that concept if you don't want to catch and keep trout than don't buy the stamp its that easy. How else do you plan to go around this? Paying to fish certain lakes because they are stocked I think theres Rainbow Paradise for that!!

dkfry · « **Reply #36 on:** Dec 11, 2007, 04:08 PM »

Quote from: Byron/PA on Dec 11, 2007, 03:16 PM

I'm just having fun with this, no need to get upset.

I really hope they are not attending a state university that my tax dollars help support, especially if there is a sports team involved, talk about unfair

In all seriousness, it doesn't seem fair, but how do you be fair in that situation??

No ones getting upset here. But saying your OPINION is logic and basically saying that yours is the only right one is very ignorant. I accept your opinion and everyone elses and one is as valid as the other.

Don't really know what you were trying to get at with state funded university remark, just fishing for conflict I guess, really shows what kind of guy you are.

Maybe try to be a little more open to others opinions next time.

JAZII · « **Reply #37 on:** Dec 11, 2007, 04:42 PM »

PA Fish Commission needs to make their budget and funds public info. That would be the only way I would agree to an increase. PFC does not do enough for warm water species.

Just look what the trout stamp got us! NO INREASE IN SIZE!
LESS TROUT STOCKED!
SMALLER CREEL LIMIT!
B.S., B.S., and more B.S.

NEW YORK lists their budget and funds publically in the regs. book.
ACCOUNTABILITY!

JAZII

Byron/PA · « **Reply #38 on:** Dec 11, 2007, 05:47 PM »

Quote

But saying your OPINION is logic and basically saying that yours is the only right one is very ignorant. I accept your opinion and everyone else's and one is as valid as the other.

Heck no, my opinion is off base plenty. And it certainly is not the only right one.

Quote

Don't really know what you were trying to get at with state funded university remark, just fishing for conflict I guess, really shows what kind of guy you are.

Was just trying to say that few things that involve our money is fair. What % of my tax dollars are spent making defense contractors rich would be another example. No fishing for conflict here, but do you think it's fair that a % of my tax dollars are used to fund state universities, when I do not attend one? Is it fair that a larger % of my tax dollars are used to fund a sports program at that school, when I have no intrest in those sports?

But back to my first post, I hope you will see that I am not claiming the PFBC in the best run operation, but as of yet, nobody has posted a better alternative.

Quote

Do I think the Fish Commission is perfect? Of course not.
Is some money wasted? Of course.
Do I like what is spent on the trout program? Nope, not at all.
Are there problems within the Commission........Yes.
Do I think the Fish Commission would be better off if they had to answer to the average angler............NO
Do I think the Fish Commission would be better off if they had to answer to the average tax payer......NO
Do I think the Fish Commission would be better off if they had to answer to the politicians........... .........NO

If you can tell me what part of this you disagree with, it would be helpful.
And, although I am not proud, or embarrassed of it, I would guess that I am at the bottom 20% income level of the people on this board................. ......So, do not think that I am asking for others to pay my way.

Again, how many days did you fish in 2007, for how many hours each day?...................... ..The cost of your license, divided by those hours must seem awful unfair

nybigeyes · « **Reply #39 on:** Dec 11, 2007, 06:17 PM »

It would be unfair if the fish Commission was a private entity and was selling us a service ala the "Fish for Fee" In which, they actually owned the land, water and invested their money into this imaginary business. As it is, we provide all the money then, get charged a fee for using the land and facilities that we pay for through the excise tax we pay on fishing boating, and hunting equipment. These are some things that I would like to see happen. Rate reversal, reverse the rates for a resident license and for a trout stamp. make the first day of trout season hatchery truck chasers pay for their fish and the infrastructure it takes to provide them. Show us some respect and that you trust us by getting rid of the "you must display your license law". New York has had my admiration on that issue since I started fishing there. And lastly, a big one for all my fans.... Lakes that are managed for icefishing and lakes set aside as ice fishing only lakes. GO TEAM!!
nybe

holeinhide · « **Reply #40 on:** Dec 11, 2007, 06:37 PM »

Quote from: JAZII on Dec 11, 2007, 04:42 PM

PA Fish Commission needs to make their budget and funds public info. That would be the only way I would agree to an increase. PFC does not do enough for warm water species.

Just look what the trout stamp got us! NO INREASE IN SIZE!
LESS TROUT STOCKED!
SMALLER CREEL LIMIT!
B.S., B.S., and more B.S.

NEW YORK lists their budget and funds publically in the regs. book.
ACCOUNTABILITY!

JAZII

This is what I am talking about Accountability. I don't mind an increase as long as the bulk of the money is going to fishery management. Do I think the average angler should manage the Fish Commission no, but should we be informed about how our lakes are being managed HE** yes. should we have an input to that management darn right we should.
Do I think the Fish Commission can please all the anglers all the time NO and it would be asking too much to expect that.
A public listing of where the money goes in the reg book is a good idea.

jig-jig THUMP · « **Reply #41 on:** Dec 11, 2007, 07:48 PM »

Marshrat,
Like Jaz and HoleHide have alluded to, and perhaps better than I stated, I expect accountability of how the license dollars, boat registration fees, etc are being handled so there is a clear understanding of where our money goes. Pardon me, but I have a sneaking suspicion that some of my money paid goes to fund trout hatchery/stocking fees even though I want no part of it (and do not buy a Trout Stamp). I think they skim some of the dollars from the general fishing license fund to help subsidize the trout program because they don't want the Trout Stamp price to be too high and because they can. I think the same thing happens with stocked pheasants, in fact in that case it has to since there is not separate stamp for pheasants. And no I don't go for the major rush to a Game Land to fight over the birds but it looks like I pay my share for others to. To me stocked trout and pheasants are add-ons to a basic fishing/hunting privilege that only those interested in pursuing should have to pay for. Leave the rest of us out of it.

If I could see the balance sheet on the lincense fees received compared to the various program costs then I'd know if my hunch was right (already know it is for the pheasants).

jjT

marshrat · « **Reply #42 on:** Dec 11, 2007, 07:53 PM »

Quote from: jig-jig THUMP on Dec 11, 2007, 07:48 PM

Marshrat,
Like Jaz and HoleHide have alluded to, and perhaps better than I stated, I expect accountability of how the license dollars, boat registration fees, etc are being handled so there is a clear understanding of where our money goes. Pardon me, but I have a sneaking suspicion that some of my money paid goes to fund trout hatchery/stocking fees even though I want no part of it (and do not buy a Trout Stamp). I think they skim some of the dollars from the general fishing license fund to help subsidize the trout program because they don't want the Trout Stamp price to be too high and because they can. I think the same thing happens with stocked pheasants, in fact in that case it has to since there is not separate stamp for pheasants. And no I don't go for the major rush to a Game Land to fight over the birds but it looks like I pay my share for others to. To me stocked trout and pheasants are add-ons to a basic fishing/hunting privilege that only those interested in pursuing should have to pay for. Leave the rest of us out of it.

If I could see the balance sheet on the lincense fees received compared to the various program costs then I'd know if my hunch was right (already know it is for the pheasants).

jjT

I agree that it would be nice to have their budget on public record but prove that the money is coming from the licenses and not the trout stamp you can't and intill they do publish there records no one can.

pocono · « **Reply #43 on:** Dec 12, 2007, 08:49 AM »

They don't have to display anything they don't want to. It is not controlled by the directly by the state, Which is public information.
You like how NY is managed well that comes under a state agency and is totally accountable to the public, not saying there will never be problems. In PA I would like to see all water ways and lakes come under one agency I think things would be easier to manage and be a plus for the users (US). The smith bill that would merge fish and game and place it under one agency I believe was a plus for the sportsmen not to mention the saving in money.

slider · « **Reply #44 on:** Dec 16, 2007, 02:47 PM »

boatnic thaqt was meant for the use of those vehicles by the fish comission

boatnik13 · « **Reply #45 on:** Dec 16, 2007, 04:48 PM »

Someone pointed that out slider but thanks for the heads-up. Guess I was reading into it too deeply. Wish I never bought a Durrango and Explorer. Keeps the repair shops in business.

Igloolou · « **Reply #46 on:** Dec 16, 2007, 05:15 PM »

Quote from: pocono on Dec 09, 2007, 08:22 AM

I strongly feel it is time for the state to take over the fish and game comission.

WHAT...........and let the politicians control the purse strings??? YEA..........that's gonna be alot better!!

How many movies can you go see for the price of a fishing license??

How many amusement parks can you go to for the price of a fishing license??

I can't believe that any one could begrudge the fish commission a license fee increase!!

For the price of a fishing license, you have 365 days of enjoyment!

I support and will gladly pay whatever amount they raise a license to.

Life is not free my friends.......and neither are our hobbies!!!

holeinhide · « **Reply #47 on:** Dec 16, 2007, 05:28 PM »

Life is not free my friends.......and neither are our hobbies!!! We were no asking for life to be free or to fish for free. We just want to see where the money goes and the only way they will do that is if it is a state run agency. As for politicians we the voter have more power than most think. The big problem is we need to work together one E-Mail or letter on a subject won't change much but 100,000 and you bet that politician will change their song in a heart beat and with that being said I am looking up my local rep's address now and will be sending an E-Mail expressing what they need to do to keep my vote.......

nybigeyes · « **Reply #48 on:** Dec 16, 2007, 05:48 PM »

Quote from: Igloolou on Dec 16, 2007, 05:15 PM

WHAT...........and let the politicians control the purse strings??? YEA..........that's gonna be alot better!!

How many movies can you go see for the price of a fishing license??

How many amusement parks can you go to for the price of a fishing license??

I can't believe that any one could begrudge the fish commission a license fee increase!!

For the price of a fishing license, you have 365 days of enjoyment!

I support and will gladly pay whatever amount they raise a license to.

Life is not free my friends.......and neither are our hobbies!!!

OK $10,000 license fee, fork it over. I have heard that anology many times before and it is worthless. To get it up to speed we would need to be subsidizing the movies and the amusement parks to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars. Considering that we don't, the services offered by those institutions appears in a different light, they have to earn their money.

I don't think anyone is begrudging anyone anything. Lets just operate the PAF&BC in a transparent manner. Show us how the money gets spent, or wasted.
nybe

Igloolou · « **Reply #49 on:** Dec 16, 2007, 06:31 PM »

So were does the money go?

Just a couple of clicks and here it is.

http://www.fish.state.pa.us/promo/annualreport/2006.pdf

iceaddiction · « **Reply #50 on:** Dec 16, 2007, 06:33 PM »

hey we could fight about this forever if we wanted. everyone has opinions. At the end of the day we are not going to get anywhere fighting about it. I dont think it is right to have kids pay to fish. there you go that is my opinion. And i also think the pbca has alot of flaws. And the money is use for the wrong think but i also love the sport too much to give it up because of a couple dollars. I pay more for a hunting liscence every year and when my tags are gone i am done but with fishing you can catch and release and enjoy the same animal over and over. So that is just my opinion if we all agreed then this world would be awful boring dont you think
ryan

slider · « **Reply #51 on:** Dec 16, 2007, 07:15 PM »

OK Boatnic dont let it happen again lol

nybigeyes · « **Reply #52 on:** Dec 16, 2007, 08:20 PM »

Looks to me like they made almost $9,000,000 in "06. Now why do they need a license fee increase?
nybe

holeinhide · « **Reply #53 on:** Dec 16, 2007, 08:56 PM »

So I gave it a good long look over and this is a partial disclosure (better than nothing) when i got to the last page with the totals it looked like they had close to 8 million surplus funds and showed no plan for them. with 8 mil why do I need to pay more? I may be way off base here as most of the information was for public feel good and not real clear about fund allocation.

nybigeyes · « **Reply #54 on:** Dec 16, 2007, 09:03 PM »

Yep, A simple tally would have sufficed. I wonder how much they spent making the Disney Brochure.

slider · « **Reply #55 on:** Dec 17, 2007, 07:10 PM »

I'm thinkin they spent more on that than the bumper stickers lol

News:

Author Topic: Can you believe this??? (Read 8391 times)